I '■'•■' 




Class JL, ¥S £> 
Book.__iI_ 



(bpyiigfit^ .. 



CJ3EYRIGHI DEPOSE 



THE 
PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 



The Psychology of Drawing 

With Special Reference to 
Laboratory Teaching 



Fred Carleton Ater 
Professor of Education, University of Oregon 




BALTIMORE : 

WARWICK & YORK, INC. 

1916 



27 ■ 



COPYRIGHT 1916, 

BY 

WARWICK & YORK, INC. 



JUL 17 1916 



2CI.A445545 



THE PSYCHOLOGY OF 
DRAWING 

PREFACE 

This book represents the results of a study of 
drawing as a device in laboratory teaching which 
has included a survey of the existing literature of 
the psychology of drawing. An attempt has been 
made to characterize the chief contributions to the 
psychology of drawing and to organize the results 
of the important studies in such a manner as to 
afford students of the various aesthetic, economic, 
and scientific aspects of drawing a scientific point 
of departure. 

It is with great pleasure that I indicate here my 
sincere appreciation for the assistance which I 
have received from teachers, friends, and students. 
Among many deserving ones I wish to mention 
in particular the names of Dr. Otis W. Caldwell, 
Professor of the Teaching of Botany; Walter Sar- 
gent, Professor of Education in Relation to Fine 
and Industrial Arts; and Dr. Charles H. Judd, 
Professor and Director of the School of Education 
of the University of Chicago. Professor Cald- 
well has given me great practical assistance in the 
setting and investigation of the laboratory prob- 



vi PREFACE 

lem involved and has been of unfailing help and 
encouragement throughout the study. I am a 
heavy debtor to Professor Sargent for numerous 
critical suggestions in the analysis of drawing and 
hearty co-operation in a number of experiments. 
Especial acknowledgment is cheerfully rendered to 
Professor Judd whose keen criticism of the con- 
tent and form of this production has removed 
many errors and contributed greatly to its merit. 

Fred Carleton Ayer. 
University of Oregon, 
September 15, 191 5. 



CONTENTS 



PART I. THE SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM 

Chapter I. The Problem Page 

I. Introduction I 

II. The General and Specific Problems 2 

1. Analytical Observation 2 

2. Laboratory Records 2 

3. Retention 3 

III. Definitions 4 

1. Analytical Observation 5 

2. Representative Drawing 6 

3. Analytical Drawing 6 

4. Memory Drawing 8 

5. Spontaneous Drawing 8 

6. Schema 8 

IV. General Procedure 9 

1. Correlation 9 

2. Memory Tests 10 

3. Introspection 10 

4. General and Special Ability 10 

5. The Effect of Analytical Seeing upon Draw- 

ing 11 

PART II. SURVEY OF THE LITERATURE OF 
DRAWING. 

Chapter II. The Methods of Research and Biblio- 
graphical Survey 

The Methods of Research 15 

I. The Gross Products Method 16 

II. The Special Products Method 18 

III. The Comparative Products Method 33 

IV. The Biographical Method 36 

V. The Experimental Method 39 

vii 



viii THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

Page 
Chapter III. Studies in the Relation of Drawing 
the Intellectual Development 

I. Industrial versus Cultural Values 49 

II. Scientific Values 55 

III. Relation of Drawing to Special and General Apti- 
tudes 58 

Chapter IV. Studies in the Analysis of the Draw- 
ing Product 

I. Gross Products 67 

II. Stages in the Development of Drawing 73 

III. Drawing as a Form of Language 79 

Chapter V. Studies in the Analysis of the Draw- 
ing Act 

I. Analysis of the Act of Drawing (Albien) 87 

II. Perceptual Development (Judd and Cowling).. . . 91 

III. Drawing Types (Albien) 92 

IV. Difficulties of Drawing (Meumann) 97 

V. Types of Retention (Meumann) 100 

PART III. EXPERIMENTS AND CONCLUSIONS. 
Chapter VI. The Experiments 

I. Representative Drawing, Description, and Dia- 
grammatic Drawing 107 

1. Problem 107 

2. Method of Procedure 107 

3. Methods of Scoring 114 

4. Method of Determining Correlation 121 

(1) Correlation by the Rank Method. . . 122 

(2) Theory of Correlation 126 

5. Results and Conclusions 129 

II. Drawing and School Grades 136 

1. Problem 136 

2. Materials 136 



CONTENTS ix 

Page 

3. Method of Procedure 136 

4. Results 137 

5. Special Observations 139 

6. Conclusion 140 

III. Retention and the Devices Used to Secure It 141 

1. Problem 141 

2. Method of Procedure, Test No. 1 141 

3. Method of Scoring 142 

4. Results of Test No. 1 142 

5. Conclusion 144 

6. Method of Procedure, Test No. 2 144 

7. Results of Test No. 2 148 

8. Conclusion 150 

IV. Analysis 'of Observation during Representative 

Drawing and Description 151 

1. Problem 151 

2. Method of Procedure 151 

3. Analysis of Description and Drawing 152 

V. The Effect of Analytical Observation upon Draw- 
ing 154 

1. Problem 154 

2. Method of Procedure 154 

3. Results 155 

4. Conclusion 156 

Chapter VII. Final Conclusions 

I. The Psychological Analysis of Drawing 157 

1. The Preconceived Purpose 157 

2. The Ability to See 158 

3. Ability to Represent 158 

II. Adaptation of Laboratory Teaching 160 

III. Analytical Observation 162 

IV. Laboratory Records 165 

V. Retention 166 

VI. Recommendations 167 

Bibliography 169 



PART I 



THE SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM 



THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO 

LABORATORY TEACHING 



Chapter I 

THE PROBLEM 

/. Introduction. 

The laboratory method has come to be prac- 
tically universal in the teaching of science. The 
process of drawing is everywhere esteemed as a 
most significant form of laboratory methodology. 
To some degree in the physical sciences, but more 
especially in the biological sciences, the amount of 
time devoted to making pen and pencil drawings 
is a major part of the laboratory procedure. Many 
pupils encounter great difficulty in making the 
required drawings. They either make poor draw- 
ings or consume a disproportionate amount of 
time in the effort to make good ones. Because of 
this, many receive low grades, are discouraged, 
and discontinue their work in the field of science. 
The widespread use of a teaching device which 
consumes extended periods of time in all cases, 
and fails to meet the needs of individual pupils 
in many cases, raises an important problem. 



2 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

II. The General and Specific Problems. 

Laboratory work brings the pupil into first-hand 
contact with the objective material with which 
its particular science is concerned. The chief end 
of laboratory work is to insure a better under- 
standing and a more permanent retention of the 
material concerned. Omitting personal demon- 
stration and instruction, laboratory procedure 
involves the following factors: 

i. Analytical Observation. The pupil is given 
oral or written directions of procedure which aim 
to direct his attention to the material in such a 
way that he will master it. Three special devices 
are used to promote analytical observation. 

(a) Representative Drawing. The student is 
asked to reproduce the object in an imitative 
drawing. "Lay the locust on its back. Make 
a careful drawing, lateral view." 

(b) Description. The student is asked to 
describe what he observes. "What is the shape 
of the head?"' 

(c) Analytical Drawing. The pupil is asked 
to explain in a schematic drawing some par- 
ticular aspect of the object. "Make a dia- 
grammatic drawing of the lily, showing the 
relative position of the pistil, stamens, petals, 
and sepals." 

2. Laboratory Records. A second factor of 
laboratory procedure is the laboratory record. 



THE PROBLEM 3 

The pupil is asked to keep a graphic record of his 
work which permits his instructor to measure his 
progress. The record consists of one or more of 
the following graphic products: 

(a) Representative drawings. 

(b) Descriptions. 

(c) Analytical drawings. 

3. Retention. A third factor of laboratory pro- 
cedure is concerned with subsequent recall. The 
results of laboratory work are fixed in memory 
according to the success of the analytical observa- 
tion and the reinforcement given by the making 
of records. 

In a word, laboratory work has three aims: the 
observation of material, the making of records, 
and the retention of learning. It furthers these 
aims by three devices: representative drawing, 
description, and analytical drawing. Our general 
problem is to determine the character of the various 
interrelations of the factors which enter into labora- 
tory procedure. 

Current practice varies as to the method of 
securing analytical observation and recording 
results. Most instructors give as few specific 
directions as practicable so that the student may 
exercise the maximum of initiative. The process 
of descriptive explanation or that of drawing is 
supposed to focus the attention upon the salient 
characteristics of the object or organism. Many 



4 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

teachers, as we shall show presently, believe that 
this is one of the particular values of representative 
drawing. Similarly, in the recording of results, 
description and drawing are used more or less 
interchangeably, varying according to the labora- 
tory manual used. Drawing almost always has 
an important place in the records and in some 
cases is used exclusively. Our special problem 
is the psychological analysis of laboratory drawing. 
Does drawing secure analytical observation? 
Is drawing a reliable record of the pupil's work? 
Does drawing promote the most desirable reten- 
tion? If the process of drawing fails in any or all 
of these respects, it follows directly that a very 
conspicuous amount of present-day laboratory 
methodology is founded upon fallacious principles 
and is in need of radical readjustment. That such 
is the case is the conclusion of this thesis, and it 
is hoped that the facts emphasized by the analysis 
of previous investigations and the results of the 
present experiments will lead to a better under- 
standing of the psychological principles involved 
in drawing as well as materially improve present- 
day methods of laboratory teaching. 

III. Definitions. 

At this point it will be well to define several 
terms which appear frequently in the pages to 
follow. An early understanding of these expres- 



THE PROBLEM 5 

sions will aid materially in following the thread of 
the succeeding discourse. 

i. Analytical Observation. Every material ob- 
ject or process has a number of characteristics 
which may be grasped in consciousness with suf- 
ficient clearness to afford a basis for comparison 
and analysis. A locust's hind legs are longer 
than his fore legs; a pendulum swings repeatedly 
in the same period of time. Certain character- 
istics, such as the lengths of the locust's legs, 
are noticed because of difference; other charac- 
teristics, such as the successive swings of the 
pendulum, are compared on the basis of similar- 
ity. In either case the observer notices the sep- 
arate items as such first and makes the compar- 
ison afterward. "The perception of sequence 
aids us in the perception of difference." 

What an individual sees in an object depends 
upon the knowledge he brings to it. But it is 
important to note that it depends upon much 
more than that. The detail of observation is 
determined by its immediate purpose. If we 
study an insect with the preconceived purpose of 
painting it, immediately we begin to compare 
items of color and form. The entire analysis is 
concerned with these things and no other. On 
the other hand, if we approach the insect with 
the preconceived purpose of discovering how 
injurious it may be to the crops, at once we attend 



6 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

to the comparative structure of the insect's mouth- 
parts, its egg-laying apparatus, or similar ana- 
tomical features. It is obvious that the items of 
analysis must be related to the problem of the 
particular moment. This is a matter of great 
pedagogical importance to laboratory teaching, 
because there are innumerable characteristics 
attaching to any object or process which are not 
of scientific importance. The analysis must in- 
volve scientific comparisons and not those of 
aesthetic, moral, or other interest. 

Our particular interest, then, in "analytical 
observation" is the interest of science, and as 
such we shall use the expression herein. The 
method of its attainment is one of our major 
problems. 

2. Representative Drawing. A drawing is "repre- 
sentative" which reproduces as accurately as 
possible the exact appearance of an object. The 
product is a visual imitation of the original. 
Representative drawing may refer either to the 
process or to the product. 

j. Analytical Drawing. When imitation is not 
the chief end, representation in drawing may be 
modified in various ways. This begins with the 
omission of certain details of surface appearance. 
A drawing of a chair does not show the grain of 
the wood. Omission continues until the mere 
outline of the object completes the representation. 



THE PROBLEM 7 

Whatever is shown is emphasized at the expense 
of the characteristics left out. 

The actual appearance of the object is altered 
in a second type of modification. This is well 
shown in the illustrations of our elementary physi- 
ologies, where the structures are greatly simplified 
in the drawings, as, for example, the cross section 
of the thorax. 

A third type transcends the limits of perspective 
and opacity. The drawing shows more than the 
eye can actually see. The same drawing, for 
example, shows the shoe, the foot, and the bones 
of the foot. This is sometimes called logical 
realism as distinguished from the visual realism 
of representative drawing. 

A fourth modification of the representative 
drawing is the type or symbolic drawing. This 
drawing portrays the characteristic features only, 
which a number of objects have in common. It 
is generic rather than specific. The type drawing 
of a bird, for example, is not an imitation of an 
actual bird, but exhibits such features as feathers, 
beak, wings, etc., which all birds have in common. 
The perfect type drawing shows all of the common 
features of the group represented. As its symbol- 
ism becomes more and more pronounced, it loses 
in visual representation until but one pronounced 
characteristic may mark the type, as when a 
single feather stands for bird. 



8 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

It must not be supposed that these four primary 
modifications of drawing are entirely distinct 
from one another. As a matter of fact, they are 
closely interrelated. In practice the schematic 
drawing is ordinarily a blend of two or more of 
the typical modifications. But whatever the form 
of the modified drawing, a preliminary compari- 
son and analysis of the characteristics which are 
to be emphasized in the drawing is necessary. 
The analysis may result in no more than the 
simple diagram of the hand, or it may lead to the 
synthesis necessary to construct a drawing which 
shows the basic floral plan of the entire rose fam- 
ily. In any case the resultant drawing is an indi- 
cation of preliminary analysis and gives rise to 
the name "analytical drawing," which we have 
chosen and will use in this sense. 

4. Memory Drawing. This expression refers to 
drawings of objects or scenes from the memory of 
one or more previous views. 

5. Spontaneous Drawing. A drawing which is 
made voluntarily by a child from memory or the 
imagination without previous suggestion of a 
subject. 

6. Schema. This term refers to any typical 
drawing which is used repeatedly to represent the 
same class of objects. A circle, for example, with 
two straight lines attached below is frequently 
the child's first "schema" for a man. At the 



THE PROBLEM 9 

other end of the scale is the mass of detailed 
schemata which the professional drawer ordinarily 
has at his command, enabling him to make an 
instant memory drawing of practically any com- 
mon form. 

IV. General Procedure. 

My attention was called to the problem involved 
in the use of drawings for analytical and repre- 
sentative purposes while directing the laboratory 
drawing of various students in biology classes. 
The frequently observed variations in drawing 
ability among students otherwise similarly gifted, 
and the difficulties with drawing experienced by 
certain pupils who were excellent in grasping scien- 
tific principles, led me to set the definite problem 
of measuring the correlation between drawing 
and the study of science. In this I have utilized 
the following general procedure. (For details 
and results of these tests, see later chapters.) 

1. Correlation. Four groups of subjects were 
carefully tested with unfamiliar objects as to their 
abilities in drawing, description, and diagramming. 
The members of each group were then ranked 
serially in the order of the merit of their produc- 
tions by a group of judges. The amount of cor- 
relation existing between any two abilities, such 
as drawing and description, was then established 
by the use of a correlation formula. The four 
groups of subjects follow. 



io THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

(a) 51 high school students of the University 
of Chicago High School, examined in 19 12. 

(b) 48 graduate students in the School of 
Education, University of Chicago, examined in 
1912. 

(c) 50 college students of the University of 
Oregon, examined in 191 3. 

(d) 61 college students of the University of 
Oregon, examined in 1913. 

2. Memory Tests. After the students in groups 
(a), (c), and (d), above, had drawn and described 
various objects, they were examined as to their 
memory of the various details. Comparison 
between the effects of the two processes was then 
made, either by the process of serial correlation 
or on a percentage-of -error basis. 

3. Introspection. Immediately after drawing 
and describing an object, group (b), above, made 
an introspective analysis of the two processes 
involved. This has been supplemented by numer- 
ous tests of individuals of a similar nature since 
1912. 

4. General and Special Ability. In 191 3 I made 
an investigation of the correlation between ability 
in drawing and aptitude in other school subjects 
on the basis of school grades. In this I compared 
the grades of the 51 University High School stu- 
dents with their ranking in drawing as discovered 
in the special tests. In addition I compared the 



THE PROBLEM II 

grades received in drawing by 141 normal school 
students with the grades received in all other 
subjects. 

5. The Effect of Analytical Seeing upon Draw- 
ing. In 191 2 I made an experimental study with 
16 subjects who were students in the University 
of Chicago School of Education. Eight of the 
subjects were directed to consider the compari- 
son between the size of the beak and of the foot 
of a bird. The other eight were directed to study 
the details of the bird's foot. The entire group 
was then directed to make an accurate repre- 
sentative drawing of the bird, which was placed 
in full view of all. Comparative measurements 
were then made of the individual drawings. 

In addition to these original tests I have had 
children of various ages and a number of adults 
make drawings to exemplify the results of a num- 
ber of the experiments listed in the following 
survey. 



PART II 

SURVEY OF THE LITERATURE OF 
DRAWING 



Chapter II 

THE METHODS OF RESEARCH AND BIB- 
LIOGRAPHICAL SURVEY 

The methods of research which have been 
employed in the analysis of the activity and re- 
sults of drawing may be divided into two general 
groups — the objective and the subjective. The 
objective methods are typical of investigations 
which have been chiefly concerned with the study 
of the products of drawing. The subjective meth- 
ods are typical of the researches which have in- 
quired more specifically into the mental or formal 
phenomena which accompany the process of draw- 
ing. It is profitable for purposes of analysis to 
subdivide the objective and subjective methods 
into a number of subordinate types which are 
characteristic of the various studies of the psychol- 
ogy of drawing up to the present time. 

Objective Methods 

i. Gross Products Method. In which the inves- 
tigation has to do with relatively indiscriminate 
collection of large numbers of drawings. 

2. Special Products Method. In which the 
study is concerned with the collection of drawings 
related to some specific theme, such as the illus- 
trations of a given story. 

15 



16 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

3. Comparative Products Method. In which the 
drawings of one typical group of individuals are 
compared to the drawings of a second, as the 
drawings of children with those of savages. 

Subjective Methods 

4. Biographical Method. In which drawings of 
the same individuals are collected in a series cover- 
ing an extended period of time and accompanied 
by records of the subjective behavior. 

5. Experimental Method. In which the act or 
process of drawing is analyzed by a relatively 
definitely controlled experiment. 

The five types of research indicated above will 
be treated in greater detail in the following sum- 
mary of methods and related bibliography. 

I. The Gross Products Method. 1 

This method involves the gathering of a great 
mass of objective material in the way of drawings 
collected by parents or teachers who are not 
familiar with accurate psychological procedure. 
The drawings are analyzed with reference to 
whate\er common facts may appear. The gross 
products method has a serious disadvantage in 



1 Compare "die statistische Methode" of Ruttmann (87) 
and "la methode de collectionnement " of Rouma (86). 
(Figures in parentheses refer to the number of the citation 
as listed in the bibliography at the close of this work.) 



THE METHODS OF RESEARCH 17 

that the more essential conditions and circum- 
stances attendant upon the individual drawing 
are not known to the interpreter of the accumulated 
results. This results in generalizations upon 
seeming similarities which are in reality due to 
different causes. There are also dangers due to 
the effects of influence unknown to the collector, 
such as advice from the parent or imitation of 
other drawings. 

Investigations of this type were very popular in 
the United States during the last decade of the 
nineteenth century and, while open to criticism, 
have paved the way for more accurate conclu- 
sions as the conditions of the drawing have been 
determined with greater precision. 

From the historical point of view, one of the 
most important studies of this type is that made 
by Carrado Ricci 1 of Bologne, Italy. His work 
created widespread interest in children's draw- 
ings and has been widely quoted by subsequent 
writers. Ricci's material included 100 drawings by 
children of his friends, 1000 drawings made in 
the common schools of Bologne, and 250 drawings 
from the schools of Modene, together with the 
modelings in clay by 20 children. Ricci's work 
discusses a number of phases of drawing which 
have been studied in detail by subsequent investi- 



1 Ricci, L'Art dei Bambini, 1887. (See bibliography for 
complete titles.) 



18 ] THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

gators, such as stages in the evolution of drawing, 
the child's sense of beauty, the development of 
the sense of color, and the art of primitive races. 

Other studies of this type are those of Hall 1 , 
O'Shea, 2 Maitland, 3 Lukens, 4 and Barnes. 5 Hall 
interpreted a number of drawings of children as 
indicative of their early thinking. O'Shea made a 
study of the drawings of a number of Wisconsin 
school children from 5 to 17 years of age. Mrs. 
Maitland made an analysis of 1570 drawings of 
California children from 5 to 17 years. Lukens 
studied the drawings of 1232 attempts at repre- 
sentation by children under 10 years. Barnes 
interpreted 700 papers by girls in London Board 
Schools writing under the direction: "Describe 
the prettiest thing you have ever seen, and say 
why you thought it pretty." 

II. The Special Products Method. 6 

With the establishment of more definite condi- 
tions as to the incentive for drawing and the com- 



1 Hall, Contents of Children's Minds on Entering School, 
1892. 

2 O'Shea, Children's Expression through Drawing, 1894. 

3 Maitland, What Children Draw to Please Themselves, 

1895. 

4 Lukens, A Study of Children's Drawings in the Early 
Years, 1896. 

5 Barnes, The Prettiest Thing, 1902. 

6 Compare "die monographische Methode" of Ruttmann 
and "la methode des enqueues" of Rouma. 



THE METHODS OF RESEARCH 19 

position of the group of drawers, the gross pro- 
ducts method passes over into the special products 
method. The incentive for drawing may vary 
according to the interest of the investigator, but 
it always centers in a definite problem. For 
instance, a group of children is asked to illustrate 
a story which has just been read to them, to draw 
a picture of a house from memory, or to represent 
some object presented directly to them. The 
homogeneity of the group is definitely restricted 
in age, training, sex, race, etc., according to the 
purpose of the study. The products obtained 
permit the analysis of the perceptual and pre- 
sentation side of drawing to a certain degree, but 
the emphasis is laid upon the product itself. It 
is not essential that the investigator be present or 
that a record be kept of the accompanying sub- 
jective phenomena. 

The majority of existing researches have util- 
ized this method in whole or in part, and a wealth 
of material has been collected. The chief center 
of activity in this field for the past decade has 
been on continental Europe, although such early 
American works as those of Barnes are of impor- 
tance in this field. 

The work of Earl Barnes 1 is one of the earliest 
attempts to interpret large numbers of children's 
drawings secured upon this basis. Barnes made 



1 Barnes, A Study of Children's Drawings, 1893. 



20 THE PSYCHOLOGY OP DRAWING 

use of an English version of the poem Hans Guck- 
In-Die-Luft, taken from Der Struwwelpeter. The 
poem was first read to the children; they were 
then told that they were to draw one or more 
pictures from the story. The story was read the 
second time and the children proceeded to draw. 
The poem follows: 

JOHNNY HEAD-IN-THE-AIR 

As he trudged along to school, 
It was always Johnny's rule 
To be looking at the sky 
And the clouds that floated by; 
But just what before him lay, 
In his way, 

Johnny never thought about; 
So that everyone cried out: 
"Look at little Johnny there, 
Little Johnny Look-In-The-Air." 

Running just in Johnny's way, 

Came a little dog one day; 

Johnny's eyes were still astray 

Up on high, in the sky; 

And he never heard them cry: 

"Johnny, mind the dog is nigh!" 

What happens now? 

Down they fell with such a thump, 

Dog and Johnny in a lump! 

They almost broke their bones, 

So hard they tumbled on the stones. 



THE METHODS OF RESEARCH 21 

Once with head as high as ever, 
Johnny walked beside the river. 
Johnny watched the swallows trying 
Which was cleverest at flying. . . 
Going in and coming out — 
This was all he thought about, 
So he strode on — only think! — 
To the river's very brink, 
Where the bank was high and steep, 
And the water very deep; 
And the fishes in a row, 
Stared to see him coming so. 

One step more! Oh, sad to tell! 

Headlong in poor Johnny fell. 

The three little fishes in dismay, 

Wagg'd their heads and swam away. 

There lay Johnny on his face, 

With his nice red writing-case; 

But, as they were passing by, 

Two strong men had heard him cry; 

And, with sticks, these two strong men 

Hook'd poor Johnny out again. 

Oh! you should have seen him shiver 

When they pulled him from the river. 

He was in a sorry plight, 

Dripping wet, and such a fright! 



22 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

This poem presents two catastrophes and, in 
all, nine scenes for illustration. The aim of the 
research was to determine what scenes were most 
often drawn; at what ages the greatest number of 
pictures were drawn; differences between boys 
and girls; and the laws governing the use of full 
face and profile. In all, Barnes collected 6393 
papers (chiefly from California), including 15,218 
pictures from children about equally distributed 
among the ages 8 to 16. S. Partridge in England, 
and Levinstein and Lamprecht in Germany, have 
used this same story and sheet of instructions. 

Clark 1 made use of some 700 drawings of chil- 
dren in a study of their difficulties with perspective. 
The first group of drawings collected were the 
products of the attempts of children to draw an 
apple with a hat pin stuck horizontally through it 
and turned at an angle to the observer. A second 
group consisted of the representations of a book 
lying side down and turned at an angle to the 
observer. 

Lena Partridge 8 has classified the drawings of 
men and women by 2000 English children from 3 
to 13 years of age. Her analysis of the graphic 
products is made for various ages on the basis 
of (1) presence of certain parts of the human 



1 Clark, The Child's Attitude toward Perspective Prob- 
lems, 1897. 

1 Lena Partridge, Children's Drawings of Men and Women, 
1900. 



THE METHODS OF RESEARCH 23 

figure, (2) mode of representation of parts, (3) 
direction and inclination of parts, (4) attention 
given to clothes, and (5) sex differences. 

Miss Findley 1 investigated the special problem 
of the presence of artistic taste among children. 

Among the studies made in France, Belgium, 
and Switzerland may be mentioned those of 
Passy, Perez, Schuyten, Claparede and Geux, 
Ivanof, and Rouma. Passy 2 and Perez s employ 
the method of direct observation of a number of 
children drawing under particular assignments. 
The results of their observations are among the 
earlier publications. Schuyten, 4 beginning in 1901, 
made a study of the evolution of the human figure 
in drawings by children from 3 to 13, using for 
the most part the special products method. He 
visited unannounced a number of schools at ap- 
proximately the same time of day and requested 
the children to draw the figure of a man as they 
were in the habit of doing. The children were 
given entire freedom in their procedure. Schuyten 
obtained 20 series of drawings, 100 for each half- 
year period of ages running from 3 to 13 years, and 
divided equally among boys and girls. He utilized 
the materials as follows: 



1 Findley, Design in the Art Training of Young Children, 
1906. 
1 Passy, Notes sur les Dessins des Enfants, 1891. 

3 Perez, L'Art et la Poesie chez l'Enfant, 1888. 

4 Schuyten, Het oorspronkelijk teekenen als bijdrage tot 
kinderanalyse, 1901. 



24 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

1. By a lengthy and minute analysis of the 
manner in which the various parts, head, mouth, 
teeth, etc., were drawn, he established a quali- 
tative coefficient of the degree of perfection of 
each group. 

2. A most elaborate quantitative study was 
made by exact and detailed measurements of all 
anatomical variations in the head, nose, neck, 
trunk, hands, etc. 

3. The development of artistic standards was 
ascertained by a comparison with classic ideals. 

4. After many attempts the endeavor to estab- 
lish types for the human figure at each age was 
abandoned. 

Probst, 1 an instructor in a native school in 
Algiers, tested some of Levinstein's conclusions 2 
in a study of a preparatory class of 53 Kabyle 
children of a tribe entirely free from European 
mixture. Probst first caused them to draw such 
pictures as they desired of their own accord. He 
then compared their choice of subjects with that 
of European children. In a second experiment he 
had them draw from memory a different type of 
object on each school day for four successive 
weeks. They drew one or more men on Mon- 
days, a quadruped on Tuesdays, a bird on Wed- 
nesdays, a familiar scene on Thursdays, and what- 



1 Probst, Les Dessins des Enfants Kabyles, 1906. 
1 See later. 



THE METHODS OF RESEARCH 25 

ever they pleased on Fridays. Probst's conclu- 
sions are not in accord with those of Levinstein. 

Claparede and Geux 1 conducted a research in 
1906 and 1907 in connection with the psycho- 
logical seminar at the University of Geneva, 
which resulted in the collection of some 12,000 
drawings from 3000 pupils. A questionnaire 
embracing definite instructions for procedure was 
distributed to a number of teachers. Under 
similar external conditions, pupils were directed: 

1. To make a representative drawing of a chair 
or a stool placed in view of all. 

2. To draw a cat from memory. 

3. To illustrate the fable, Le Corbeau et le 
Renard. 

4. To draw from choice whatever and however 
they wished. 

Instructions were given to guard against copy- 
ing, communication, and fatigue. All of the 
drawings were made with a pencil and ordinarily 
lasted five minutes. The instructors appended to 
the sheet of drawings of each child the sex, nation- 
ality, class, rank in class, general ability, subjects 
in which the greatest and least ability was shown, 
and remarks as to the mental type or additional 
peculiarities. The aim of the research was to 
answer a two-fold problem, (1) how taste and 



1 Claparede and Geux, Plan d'Experiences Collectives sur 
le Dessin des Enfants, 1907. 



26 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

aptitude for drawing evolve, and (2) what corre- 
lation exists between aptitude in drawing and 
aptitude for work in general. The latter problem 
was assigned to one of Claparede's students, E. 
Ivanof, 1 who made a careful study of 9764 draw- 
ings from the original collection. 

Rouma, 2 in connection with various classes of 
subjects in Belgium and Switzerland, has made 
an elaborate series of studies in which he makes 
use of diverse methods, the results of which are 
published in his book, Le Langage Graphique de 
V Enfant, which contains one of the clearest treat- 
ments of the subject available. For the sake of 
unity, all of his study is mentioned here. The 
chief sources of Rouma's materials cover a period 
of years, as follows: 

1. From October, 1900, to July, 1901, he 
gave two hours per day to the collection of 
drawings of eight children of rich parents. Part 
of the time was given to the collection of spon- 
taneous drawings with the accompanying com- 
ments of the children, and part to the drawing 
of suggested themes, such as: When I was a 
little boy; The trip to the country; The soldiers. 

2. From September, 1901, to July, 1905, 
Rouma had the following subjects treated by 
all the classes in a school for retarded children 
and in a number of schools for normal children. 



1 Ivanof, Correlation entre l'Aptitude au Dessin et les 
autres Aptitudes, 1908. 
a Rouma, La Langage Graphique de l'Enfant, 1913. 



THE METHODS OF RESEARCH 27 

(a) Man, woman, little boy, little girl, soldier, 

cavalier. 

(b) The family house. 

(c) A man walking with his little dog. 

(d) A lady taking her baby a ride in a baby 

carriage. 

(e) Two girls playing ball. One of them 

throws the ball through the window. 
It is broken. 

(f) A thief escapes pursued by a gendarme. 

The thief carries a hen which he has 
stolen under his arm. 

(g) Saint-Nicolas. 

(h) Subjects from choice. 

3. From September, 1901, to July, 1903, 
Rouma met a class of 40 pupils, aged 6 to 8, 
regularly one-half hour per week. The mem- 
bers drew alternately from free choice and dic- 
tation. 

4. From September, 1904, to July, 1905, 
Rouma collected spontaneous and suggested 
drawings from a class of thirty backward chil- 
dren, aged 9 to n, devoting six one-half -hour 
periods to this task per week. He also noted 
all comments which accompanied the drawings 
of certain selected pupils, discovering many 
factors thereby which escaped attention other- 
wise. 

5. From September, 1905, to July, 1906, 
Rouma made a study of twenty-six abnormal 
children in a special class in Brussels. The 
drawings were made from choice and by way of 
interpretation of a given subject. The develop- 
ment of modeling and language was studied at 
the same time. Rouma calls attention to the 



28 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

fact that the slower development of the stages 
of drawing among abnormal children makes 
possible a more detailed study of the individual 
steps. Paralleling this research, Rouma made 
a study of the drawings of the pupils of a Froe- 
belian school and a primary school. 

6. In 1908, under the personal supervision of 
Rouma, a number of teachers in the Froebelian 
schools of Charleroi kept a record of the spon- 
taneous drawings and accompanying comments 
of selected pupils in their classes. 

In addition to the above mentioned researches 
Rouma made studies of the pupils of other schools 
and of certain normal and abnormal children not 
attending school. His final treatment includes a 
discussion of the stages of evolution in drawing, 
the various characteristics of the drawing-image, 
the evolution of drawing as a form of language, 
the bearing of drawing upon intellectual develop- 
ment and attention, modeling, the culture of 
aptitude in drawing, and the place of drawings in 
the interrelations of race and species. 

Among the leading German investigations of 
the special products type are those of Levinstein, 
Verworn, Kerschensteiner, Lamprecht, Kik, Wil- 
liam Stern, Diick, and Wagner. The works of 
Levinstein and Verworn extend into and will be 
described under the comparative products method. 

Kerschensteiner 1 made a monumental research 



1 Kerschensteiner, Die Entwickelung der zeichnerischen 
Begabung, 1905. 



THE METHODS OF RESEARCH 29 

in the interests of reforming the drawing instruc- 
tion in Munich. He aimed to discover (a) the 
entire course of the development of drawing from 
the first schema to the ultimate representation of 
space, and (b) the quality of representative ex- 
pression attainable by children 6 to 14 years of 
age. In 1903 Kerschensteiner obtained 96,000 
drawings from 7000 children of the Munich schools, 
2500 of whom possessed special aptitude in draw- 
ing. The children were asked to represent as 
follows : 

Trial I. From memory: (a) the picture of 

their mother, their father, their own picture; 

(b) a horse, a dog and a cat, a bird; (c) an 

angel. 

After nature: a child of the class. 
Trial 2. From memory: (a) a flower, a tree; 

(b) a chair, a church, a tramway. 

After nature: a chair, a violin, a 

pitcher. 
Trial 3. A battle in the snow. 

The 2,500 children with special talent in draw- 
ing represented: 

(a) a man carrying a beam; (b) a woman carry- 
ing a water-cask; (c) a building of the vil- 
lage, after nature. 

Kerschensteiner obtained the record of each 
pupil's age, ability, profession of parents, if 
possessed of a book of pictures, and if accustomed 
to draw at home. He concluded, however, that a 



30 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

large number of the drawings had been subject to 
outside influence and instituted another series of 
tests in 1904, including in addition to the regular 
pupils a school of idiots and a number of kinder- 
gartens. In the second series he secured 100,000 
drawings. 

The drawings were classified according to a 
detailed sheet of instructions by the teachers. 
Kerschensteiner had all pupils showing marked 
talent draw in his presence afterward. When he 
was assured of the perfect fairness of the children's 
work, he began to collect documents which would 
aid in explaining this exceptional aptitude. 

In a third series, 52,000 additional drawings 
were collected which had been used in the orna- 
mentation of a book and a plate. Kerschen- 
steiner made a number of supplementary tests to 
clear uncertain points, particularly in connection 
with perspective. The drawing instruction in 
Munich had been reorganized on the basis of the 
results of this research and Kerschensteiner's 
work is a distinct contribution to the psychology 
and pedagogy of drawing. 

Lamprecht, 1 with the aim of contributing to the 
study of the history of civilization, beginning in 
1904 at the University of Leipsig, initiated an 
international research upon a vast scale. Lam- 

1 Lamprecht, Les Dessins d'Enfants comme Source His- 
torique, 1906. 



THE METHODS OF RESEARCH 31 

precht sent a sheet of detailed instructions to 
various countries, involving the collection of the 
following types of drawings: 

1. Spontaneous drawings of children who 
have not been influenced by suggestion or 
training. 

2. Specified representative drawings of: 

(a) objects isolated in space, as a dog, table, 
flower, etc. 

(b) illustrated incidents, stories, etc. 

3. Series of drawings from the same child. 

4. Drawings of adults, particularly those 
with non-professional occupations. 

For comparative purposes a large number of 
drawings were secured from the poem Hans 
Guck-In-Die-Luft, using the Barnes method. In 
addition data were collected as to the age, train- 
ing, intelligence, and social position of the various 
subjects. A vast number of drawings were se- 
cured from Belgium, Sweden, Italy, England, 
Russia, Japan, America, India, and Africa, all of 
which have been classified and filed in the museum 
of the "Seminar for Culture and Universal His- 
tory" at Leipsig. Levinstein (61) (see bibli- 
ography), Kohler (58), and Kretzschmar (59) 
have made researches in connection with the 
classification and interpretation of this vast body 
of material 

Kik 1 made a study of thirteen drawers of mark- 

1 Kik, Die iibernormale Zeichenbegabung bei Kindern, 
1908. 



32 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

edly exceptional ability, part of the subjects 
working in his presence. He gave particular at- 
tention to environmental influences and the rela- 
tion between drawing aptitude and intelligence. 

William Stern, 1 beginning in 1905, directed an 
inquiry at Breslau embracing the drawings of 
1500 pupils, aged 6 to 18, from the primary, 
middle, and high schools. The pupils endeavored 
to interpret a poem of some fifty verses which 
had been read to them. The resultant drawings 
were analyzed as to (1) individual differences, (2) 
progress with age, (3) representation of space, (4) 
the problem of time, and (5) differences in sex. 

Wagner 2 interpreted the foregoing material, 
classifying the possible motives of the drawings, 
giving percentages of frequency* for representation 
of movement, human figure, indications of humor, 
etc., and characterizing the developmental stages 
of drawing. 

Diick 3 made a special study of the interests of 
children in drawing and art, noting particularly 
the changes of interest at the time of puberty. 



1 Stern, Spezielle Beschreibung der Ausstellung freier 
Kinderzeichnungen aus Breslau, 1906. 

'Wagner, Das frie Zeichnen von Volksschulkindern, 1913. 

3 Diick, Uber das zeichnerische und kiinstlerische Interesse 
der Schiiler, 1913. 



THE METHODS OF RESEARCH 33 

III. The Comparative Products Method. 1 

The comparative products method arises out of 
various combinations of the gross and special 
products methods. Drawings which have been 
obtained from one group of individuals are com- 
pared to the products of some other group. The 
drawings are taken to be significant of certain 
psychological traits of the groups concerned. It 
is hoped to reveal the relations existing between 
the respective groups by means of a study of the 
similarities in the drawing products. In this way 
advantage is taken of groups of drawings already 
carefully organized, such as may be found in 
many ethnological studies. 

There is no question that drawings may be 
utilized to reveal certain mental characteristics 
and thus prove valuable for comparative pur- 
poses. The validity of comparative generaliza- 
tions, however, naturally depends upon the or- 
iginal method of obtaining the drawings. In 
view of this fact, considerable caution must be 
used in dealing with "gross products" drawings. 

The comparative products method has been 
made use of by many investigators to enlarge the 
scope of their original researches. The most 
common contrast is the one made between a series 
of drawings of normal children with those of some 



1 Includes Ruttmann's "die ethnologische Methode." 



34 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

other homogeneous group. In this manner the 
drawings of normal children have been compared 
with (i) the drawings of savages, (2) the drawings 
of prehistoric peoples, (3) the drawings of the 
pathologically degenerate, (4) the drawings of 
children of other races, (5) the drawings of illit- 
erate adults, and (6) the art products of earlier 
periods of civilization. In addition numerous 
studies have considered the parallels existing 
between the sexes, between general ability and 
drawing aptitude, and between drawing and 
other types of expression, such as modeling, writ- 
ing, and language. In making comparisons with 
the drawings of savages and prehistoric peoples, 
advantage is frequently taken of the materials 
collected and organized in such excellent studies 
as those of Danzel, 1 Haddon, 2 Koch-Griinberg, s 
Grosse, 4 Verworn, 5 Wilson, 6 and in the Annual 
Reports of the United States Bureau of Ethnology. 
The researches of Schuyten, Probst, Ivanof, 
Lamprecht, Stern, and Kik, which utilize the 
comparative method in part, have already been 
mentioned. Levinstein 7 utilized the drawings 

1 Danzel, Die Anfange der Schrift, 1912. 
1 Haddon, Evolution in Art, 19 14. 

• Koch-Grunberg, Anfange der Kunst im Urwald, 1906. 

* Grosse, The Beginnings of Art, 1897. 

B Verworn, Zur Psychologie der primitive Kunst, 1908. 
•Wilson, Prehistoric Art, 1896. 

7 Levinstein, Kinderzeichnungen mit Parallelen aus der 
Urgeschichte, Kulturegeschichte und Volkerkunde, 1905. 



THE METHODS OF RESEARCH 35 

collected by Lamprecht in a study of the compar- 
ative type. Three of the eight chapters of his 
interesting book are given to a discussion of these 
parallels. Levinstein also treats in considerable 
detail the general question of children's drawings 
and appends an extensive bibliography in his 
publication. Gennep 1 has elaborated a special 
treatment of this type, and similar discussions may 
be found in Chamberlain, 2 Sully, 3 Wundt, 4 and 
Meumann. 5 

Max Verworn 6 began a study of the relation- 
ships existing between the drawings of children 
and primitive peoples in 1906. Verworn col- 
lected the drawings of a large number of rustic 
children, aged 6 to 14, believing that their environ- 
ment made something of an approach to that of 
the primitive. The children drew from memory 
such familiar forms as a goat, cow, horse, sun, 
moon, man, and woman. In a second study Ver- 
worn had children copy drawings of the paleolithic 
age which represented reindeer and mammoths. 
Then followed a series of drawings in which the 

1 Gennep, Dessins d'Enfant et Dessins Prehistorique, 
1911. 

2 Chamberlain, The Child, a Study in the Evolution of 
Man, 1900. 

3 Sully, Studies of Childhood, 1895. 

4 Wundt, Volkerpsychologie, 1900-09. 

5 Meumann, Experimentelle Padagogik, 1914. 

6 Verworn, Zur Psychologie der primitiven Kunst, 1908. 



36 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

children each time drew their previous drawing. 
Verworn sought by this parallel to clarify certain 
points in the serial development of primitive 
drawings. 

Lobsien 1 repeated Schuyten's experiment to 
discover if a parallel existed between advance in 
age and an approach to the canons of art. He 
discards Schuyten's detailed measurements and 
selects the best and poorest drawers of ages 8, II, 
13, and 14. His conclusions vary somewhat from 
those of Schuyten. 

The researches of Rouma and Levinstein in the 
field of the drawings of abnormal children have 
been mentioned. Rudolf Lindner 1 compared the 
drawings of deaf and dumb children with those of 
normal children by having the pupils of the Leip- 
sig Deaf and Dumb Institute follow Kerschen- 
steiner's directions for drawing a tramcar from 
memory. 

IV. The Biographical Method* 

This method endeavors to obtain all of the facts 
connected with an extended series of drawings by 
individual children. The observer is familiar 
with psychological methods and keeps detailed 



1 Lobsien, Kinderzeichnung und Kunstkanon, 1905. 

2 Referred to by Meumann, Experimented Padagogik, 
Bd. Ill, p. 758. 

3 Compare Luquet's "methode microscopique." 



The methods of research 37 

records of the subjective phenomena accompany- 
ing the drawings of the same child for a period of 
several years. For the most part this method has 
been used in studying the spontaneous drawings of 
children prior to the influence of special instruc- 
tion. More recently this has been varied by the 
introduction of special themes for interpretation 
or has been extended into the school period. The 
biographical method is practically free from the 
sources of error common to the exclusively ob- 
jective methods and, in connection with other 
methods, offers a most fertile field for investiga- 
tion. Many excellent researches have been made 
with biographical material. 

An early study of this type was made under the 
direction of Elmer E. Brown, 1 who interpreted four 
extended studies of the drawings of individual 
children Miss M. V. Shinn followed the drawings 
of a child from the 27th to the 64th month, Cath- 
erine W. Slack watched a second child from the 
36th to the 60th month, Eleanor G. Sharp studied 
a third child from the 28th to the 60th month, 
and Lulu M. Chapman, a fourth child from the 
32d to the 48th month. Brown collected data on 
the development of each child from the following 
points of view: (1) circumstances at the begin- 
ning of drawing, (2) degree of representation, 
beauty, and symmetry in the drawing, (3) first 

1 Brown, Notes on Children's Drawings, 1897. 



38 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

attempts at copy drawing, (4) child's attitude to- 
ward drawing, (5) symbolism, (6) conventional- 
ism, (7) size, direction, and form of outlines, and 
(8) changing interests in form and color. 

Louise Hogan 1 made an extended bibliograph- 
ical study of the drawings of a child up to the age 
of eight, treating both spontaneous and suggested 
drawings. Lukens 2 followed the drawings of a 
little girl from the 27th to the 56th month. His 
treatment contains a very good summary of 
studies of children's drawings up to that time. 

C. and W. Stern 3 traced the developmental 
stages in drawing by the study of the early draw- 
ing periods and artistic interests of a little boy. 
Luquet,* using what he terms the "methode 
microscopique," has made the most elaborately 
detailed study of the biographical type up to the 
present time. His book of 262 pages and 150 
plates of drawings contains a very complete analyt- 
ical account of the development of the drawings of 
the little girl, Simonne Luquet, from a little over 
three years of age to nearly nine. Luquet col- 
lected a series of over 1700 drawings with the 
accompanying comments and made a careful 

1 Hogan, A Study of a Child, 1898. 

8 Lukens, A Study of Children's Drawings in the Early 
Years, 1896. 

' C. and W. Stern, Die zeichnerische Entwickelung eines 
Knaben, 1909. 

4 Luquet, Les Dessins d'un Enfant, 1913. 



THE METHODS OF RESEARCH 39 

record of all subjective conditions. Other re- 
searches involving the biographical method have 
been made by Baldwin, 1 Moore, a Preyer, 3 Sully, 4 
and others. 

V. The Experimental Method. 

The experimental method attempts to analyze 
the process of drawing by setting up a definite 
and precise control of the drawing act which takes 
into account the subjective as well as the objective 
aspects of drawing. It attempts to measure the 
response of individual drawers to known and con- 
trollable conditions. As distinguished from ob- 
jective methods, very careful attention is given to 
the inner mental conditions of the individual sub- 
jects. The attempt is made to determine indi- 
vidual variations in such subjective factors as per- 
ception, type of imagery, memory, endowment, 
and training. In general, the problem is to reduce 
the drawing process to its elements for purposes 
of ultimate analysis of the ordinarily synthesized 
activity by the employment of the methods of 
experimental psychology. 

In the majority of existing researches the meth- 
ods of control have been but partial at best, but, 

1 Baldwin, Mental Development in the Child and the 
Race, 1897. 
1 Moore, The Mental Development of a Child, 1896. 

3 Preyer, The Mind of the Child, 1899. 

4 Sully, Studies of Childhood, 1895. 



40 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

as a whole, the results obtained by the experimental 
method are of the greatest significance both to the 
psychology and the pedagogy of drawing. The 
chief researches follow. 

Judd and Cowling 1 made an experimental 
analysis of the various elements which enter into 
the process of the visual perception of a simple 
figure. A small linear figure composed of four 
straight and three curved lines was exposed to 
the view of a number of subjects for a period of 
ten seconds. The subjects immediately after- 
ward attempted to reproduce the figure in a draw- 
ing. The figure was then exposed again and a 
second drawing attempted. This process was 
repeated until the subject had attained an ap- 
proximately correct percept of the figure. By a 
comparison of the objective results with the intro- 
spections of the various subjects, the investigators 
were enabled to trace the development of the per- 
ceptual process and the ability to reproduce the 
figure graphically. 

Katz 2 studied the individual differences in repre- 
sentative drawing among children by having three 
girls of 5, 6, and 7 years draw in succession with 
ruler and pencil the following models made out of 
blue pasteboard: (i) triangle, (2) quadrate, (3) 

1 Judd and Cowling, Studies in Perceptual Development, 
1897. 

2 Katz, Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Kinderzeichnungen, 
1906. 



THE METHODS OF RESEARCH 41 

parallelogram, (4) ellipse, (5) circle, (6) cube, (7) 
flat quadrate with four supports in the form of a 
four-legged table, (8) three-sided pyramid, (9) 
regular tri-lateral. In a second series of drawings 
Katz investigated the elements of the perceptual 
process and attention which gave rise to the 
peculiar characteristics of individual drawings. 

Albien 1 has contributed an elaborate experi- 
mental study concerning the elements entering 
into the drawing act which is of first importance 
to the psychology and pedagogy of drawing. The 
experiments were carried on with individual 
pupils in Albien's home. The first was conducted 
by Meumann. The others were taken up during 
a period of about eight weeks, during which Albien 
tested from two to four pupils daily. The process 
of representative drawing from copy was taken to 
consist of two major processes: (1) the optical- 
perceptional part, and (2) the graphical-reproduc- 
tive part, involving the representation of the 
previously apprehended and assimilated optical 
images. Each of these major processes was taken 
to consist of a number of subordinate elemental 
part-processes. (See discussion later.) 

The aim of Albien's research was to set up an 
experiment which would isolate the various part- 
processes of the drawing act. To this end figures 

1 Albien, Der Anteil der Nachkonstruierenden Tatigkeit 
des Auges und der Apperception an dem Behalten und der 
Wiedergabe einfacher Formen, 1907. 



42 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

were selected for "copy" which provided for the 
following considerations : 

1. The resemblance of the "copy" to known 
figures was controlled so as to reduce the play 
of memory to a definite minimum. Three 
figures were selected for copy; the first being 
practically foreign to the previous experience of 
the subjects, the second resembling the contour 
of known forms, and the third of medium dif- 
ficulty. 

2. The constructive activity of the eye and 
hand movements and of the apperceptive pro- 
cesses was controlled by artificial interruption. 
Eye movements were excluded, when desirable, 
by means of a definite fixation point marked on 
the copy. The involuntary drawing move- 
ments of the hand during preliminary percep- 
tion were excluded by rhythmic movements of 
the hands. 

3. An attempt to exclude the will during 
perception was made by asking the pupils not 
to think about drawing the object during the 
process of fixation. 

The experiment as a whole was carried on in 
three chief parts. 

Part I. Drawing After Fixating Seeing (Zeichnen 
nach fixierenden Sehen). 

In this part of the experiment each of the three 
types of copy was exposed by means of a tachisto- 
scope for a period of ten seconds (repeated when 
desirable), during which time the eye was kept 



THE METHODS OF RESEARCH 43 

fixed upon the fixation mark near the center of 
the figure, all of the figure, however, lying within 
the field of the subject's vision. The subject then 
attempted to reproduce the image of the copy by 
drawing it. The subject was then asked: 

"Do you consider the drawing to be correct?" 
"Can you tell what is wrong? Where is 
anything lacking?" 

"What is the cause of it? Is it that you can- 
not see accurately and cannot draw satisfac- 
torily?" 

Part II. Drawing from Memory (Nach der Vor- 
stellung aus dem Geddchtnis) . 
Each subject was permitted to observe the copy 
until he thought he could draw it from memory. 
The drawing was then executed. The time of 
the observation and execution was recorded and 
the following questions asked: 

"Is the drawing difficult? Why? or, What 
is the cause?" 

"Upon what do you depend in memory draw- 
ing?" Other questions are supplemented ac- 
cording to individual needs. 

Part III. Representative Drawing from Copy 
(Abzeichnen der Vorlage). 
In conclusion each figure was drawn with the 
copy in view. The time of drawing was recorded. 
All subjective manifestations were recorded 
throughout the entire experiment. 



44 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

The subjects for the experiment were selected by 
Albien from a local raz/-school and included classes 
Sexta to Untersekunda, with the following age 
distribution : 



Sexta 


96 


mbjects 


9-10 years 


Quinta 


9 


ii 


11-12 " 


Quarta 


10 


ii 


13-14 " 


Tertia 


9 


ii 


15-16 " 


Untersekunda 


8 


ii 


17-18 " 



The pupils in the Sexta had had no lessons in 
drawing. The others had received two hours per 
week in freehand drawing. From the original 
classes, containing about fifty pupils each, Albien 
selected one good, one medium, and one poor 
drawer with good general intelligence, and one 
good, one medium, and one poor drawer with poor 
general intelligence. In conclusion Albien ana- 
lyzed the various types of drawers and the effects of 
endowment, perserveration, the feelings, and re- 
flection, upon drawing. 

Stiehler 1 made an instructive experiment to 
determine the relation between construction and 
drawing, with the particular aim of distinguishing 
between the physical concept and the drawing 
concept attaching to the same object. The experi- 
ment, having eighteen children as subjects, was 
conducted in two parts. 



1 Stiehler, Beitrage zur Psychologie und Methodik des 
Zeichenunterrichts, 1913. 



THE METHODS OF RESEARCH 45 

1. Each child placed a match-box at a dis- 
tance of about 60 cm. in such a manner that it 
stood obliquely and lower than the eyes. The 
children were admonished to note the number 
of surfaces, their arrangement, size, and form; 
and at the same time, however, they were not 
to turn their heads in order that the perception 
might always occur from the same visual angle. 
Nothing was said with regard to perspective 
phenomena, foreshortening of size, and shifts 
in form. After observation and general delib- 
eration, the box was set aside. It was then 
drawn from memory. 

2. The match-boxes were then touched, 
rubbed, pressed, relaxed, turned; there was 
counting, measuring with strips of paper, com- 
parison; first with the eyes closed, then open. 
The representation was then made from memory. 

The results of these two tests were interpreted 
in light of the accompanying remarks of the sub- 
jects. 

Peter 1 has recently experimented with an analysis 
of the elements attached to the mastery of the 
perspective relationships in drawing objects which 
are situated back of other objects. Peter required 
the pupils to draw a scene viewed through an inter- 
vening window. 

Beside the part played in Albien's experiments, 
Meumann 1 records in his treatment of The Ana- 



1 Peter, Beitrage der Analyse der zeichnerische Begabung, 
1914. 

2 Meumann, Vorlesungen zur Einftihrung In die Experi- 
mentelle Padagogik, 1914. 



46 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

lysis of Drawing two further experiments worthy 
of note here. In the first series Meumann had a 
group of subjects draw from memory a number of 
familiar objects. Certain of the subjects were 
then directed to describe the objects from memory, 
or, failing in this, to describe the objects when 
pictures of them were placed before them. Various 
individuals were questioned as to their difficulties 
in drawing from memory. In addition, individual 
hand dexterity was studied and a comparison was 
made of the memory (auswendig) drawings follow- 
ing short and long exposure. 

In a second series of experiments directed by 
Meumann, an attempt was made to classify the 
types of drawing retention and the elemental 
processes of the drawing act. In this study ob- 
jects of gradually increasing difficulty were pre- 
sented for representative drawing (Abzeichen). 
These included such objects as a piece of lime-spar 
lying upon a cigar box, and a cigaret box with 
crayon and inkstand. The following types of 
drawing were secured: 

i. After the subject announced that the ex- 
posure had been long enough for sufficient ob- 
servation, the object was covered and drawn 
from memory. 

2. Out of recollection, usually one day later, 
of the first attempt. 

3. From memory after an exposure of one 
minute. 



THE METHODS OF RESEARCH 47 

4. The same object as in 3 after one day. 

5. From memory after an exposure of about 
ten seconds. 

6. From memory after a tachistoscopic ex- 
posure of about one-half second. 

7. Objects from which all subjective con- 
struing had been excluded. 

8. From the recollection of a picture, such as, 
The Birth of Christ. 

9. After an attempt at influencing the mem- 
ory by suggestion. 

Immediately after each drawing each subject 
was asked questions to bring out individual vari- 
ations in the subjective elements of the drawing 
act. Finally a stamp, the Hamburg escutcheon, 
and the subject's own pocketbook were drawn 
from memory. The subjects were also tested in 
hand skill and types of imagery. 



Chapter III 

STUDIES IN THE RELATION OF DRAWING 
TO INTELLECTUAL DEVELOPMENT 

I. Industrial versus Cultural Values. 

The rise 1 of drawing in the public school program 
of studies has been due to two more or less con- 
flicting art interests, the industrial and the cul- 
tural. Drawing made very little headway in the 
United States until emphasis upon its economic 
value secured the support of such educational 
leaders as Horace Mann and Henry Barnard. 
The publication of a number of foreign articles on 
the value of drawing together with the public- 
spirited work 3 of such men as William Bentley 
Fowle, Rembrandt Peale, and William Minifie, 
kept an interest in public school drawing alive, 
but until 1870 progress was practically counter- 
acted by a widespread conception of drawing as an 
"amusing exercise." 

In 1870 the state of Massachusetts enacted a 
law which states that "mechanical and industrial" 



1 No attempt is made here to give even a summary of the 
historical rise of drawing, an account of which may be found 
in Jessup, Clarke, Haney, or Farnum. (See bibliography.) 

2 Haney, Development of Art, pp. 21-33. 

49 



So THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

drawing may be freely taught in any city and town, 
and free instruction must be given in cities and 
towns of over 10,000 inhabitants. This was 
followed by the selection of Walter Smith of the 
School of Arts in Leeds, England, as State Agent. 
Smith was a few years later made director of the 
newly established Massachusetts Normal Art 
School. 

"As directors of the foremost Art Schools, 
State Supervisors, city directors, editors and 
writers, craftsmen, painters, sculptors, and 
architects, the alumni of this particular school 
and their children of one and two generations 
lead in the art world of the United States 
today." 1 

The Massachusetts movement spread rapidly to 
other states, but the great emphasis given to 
mechanical and industrial drawing was followed by 
a reaction, chiefly on the part of teachers, toward 
an emphasis of the intellectual values of drawing. 
This is well illustrated in a quotation cited by 
Jessup. 1 

"The old style of drawing consisted princi- 
pally of picture making from copies. The new 
is an intellectual study; the thought, ingenuity, 
and invention of the scholar in the line of art 
as supplied to industrial pursuits. The influ- 
ence of this branch is manifold; it especially 

1 Farnum, Present Status of Drawing and Art in Schools, 
p. 18. 

2 Jessup, Special Supervision in the Public Schools of the 
United States, p. 29. 



RELATION OF DRAWING TO DEVELOPMENT 51 

develops: (1) observation; (2) forethought; (3) 
painstaking; (4) taste, imagination; (5) memory 
of forms; (6) power to discriminate — judgment; 
(7) ease and precision in the movements of the 
hand. As drawing is opposed to carelessness, 
haste, bad forms, and clumsy execution, it is a 
valuable art in teaching writing." Report of 
the Schools of Erie, Pennsylvania, 1877-78. 

The prevailing belief in the disciplinary value of 
drawing is summarized in Clarke's voluminous 
work 1 in 1888 as follows: 

"The value of drawing as a means of mental 
discipline is believed to be not inferior to that 
of any of the studies at present included in the 
curriculum of the public schools. It is, there- 
fore, not only because of its direct application 
to the industries and art and hence of economic 
value to the pupil, that this study of drawing 
has a claim to admission into the public schools. 
Its value as a means of developing and training 
the intellectual faculties is so well established, 
from the professional point of view of the teacher, 
and, regarded merely as an instrument of 
pedagogics, the progressive system of ... 
industrial drawing can readily establish its 
claim for introduction into the elementary 
course of instruction on educational grounds 
alone." 

A value of drawing which is of greater cultural 
breadth than the so-called intellectual value, and 
which may be called the aesthetic value, received 

Clarke, I. E., Art and Industry, Part I, CXXII. See 
Jessup, p. 29. 



52 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

widespread acceptance through the interest in 
design and decoration stimulated by the art 
exhibits of the World's Fairs at Chicago in 1893 and 
St. Louis in 1904. With the development of this 
interest there has been a marked tendency to 
correlate the cultural and industrial work in the 
school arts which has resulted in a realignment of 
the values of drawing. 

Henry Turner Bailey 1 gives the following reasons 
for requiring drawing in the public schools: 

"1. Drawing is a language of form: (a) 
graphic recorder of scientific fact; (b) expres- 
sion of constructive and decorative art; (c) 
medium for expression of ideas of artistic beauty. 

"2. Practice in drawing promotes: (a) close 
observation, thus insuring clear mental images; 
(b) muscular control or skill of hand; a pre- 
requisite in the practice of any craft; (c) a 
knowledge of the elements of beauty in nature 
and art, the basis of design, and the grounds 
for intelligent taste and appreciation. 

"3. The study of drawing opens the mind to 
the treasures of nature and the various arts; 
increases the pleasure and general significance 
of life." 

In contrast to this, Sargent's 2 analysis of drawing 
as representation differentiates the following 
values : 



1 Bailey, Monroe's Cyclopedia of Education, 1912. 

2 Sargent, Fine and Industrial Arts in Elementary Schools, 
1912. 



RELATION OF DRAWING TO DEVELOPMENT 53 

1. General. "Drawing is a language, a mode 
of reproducing ideas, and as such is a means of 
forming and developing these ideas." "Draw- 
ing develops ability of concrete habits of 
thought." "Drawing stimulates the mental 
activity of children." 

2. Industrial. "To the man engaged in 
constructive work, drawing offers a means of 
endless experimentation . ' ' 

3. Scientific. "In scientific studies drawing 
focuses the attention upon, and quickens obser- 
vation of, facts of form and structure, rendering 
the senses more accurate in their testimony and 
furnishing a means of making definite records." 

4. Aesthetic. "Representation is also the 
language of the fine arts of painting and sculp- 
ture." 

R. B. Farnum, 1 who has recently made a thor- 
ough-going investigation into the status of draw- 
ing and art in the elementary and secondary 
schools of the United States for the Bureau of 
Education and is probably mo^e familiar with the 
general situation than any other man in the country, 
states that: 

"The broad and general purpose of culture 
through art education may be roughly sub- 
divided into three distinct aims. . . which 
are universally agreed upon. Such an educa- 
tion should train (a) in expression, (b) in obser- 
vation, (c) in appreciation." 



1 Farnum, Present Status of Drawing and Art in Schools, 
1914. 



54 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

(a) Expression. "As an outward expression 
of the mental processes, the value of the study 
of art lies in stimulating the finest ideals and in 
giving command of the best means of expressing 
them." 

(b) Observation. "Keen and accurate obser- 
vation, then, is fundamental to art and is an 
asset in the broadest sense. It calls for close 
analysis and stimulates the initiative of the 
discoverer." 

(c) Appreciation. "Appreciation as applied 
to master creations of the artist in architecture, 
sculpture, painting, to the forms of minor art 
seen in the works of the craftsman, to nature, 
to the very environment of the person himself, 
is the third aim in art education." 

With these several aims of drawing in mind, it 
is interesting to note the emphasis that is given to 
technical ability in college entrance requirements. 
The following university entrance requirement 1 
must be met by candidates who apply for five 
credits in freehand or mechanical drawing: 

Freehand Drawing. The applicant must pos- 
sess ability: 

1. To make rapid sketches from objects 
which shall indicate the perspective appearance, 
the proportions, and the main characteristics of 
structure and form. 

2. To make as records of observations such 
drawings as would be appropriate for illustra- 
tion to accompany high school studies in the 
sciences. 



1 University of Chicago Entrance Requirements, 1912. 



RELATION OF DRAWING TO DEVELOPMENT 55 

3. To sketch freehand, from specifications, 
any simple geometric figure. 

4. To match with water colors any given 
color, or to carry a flat wash of color over a 
given area. 

Mechanical Drawing. The applicant must pos- 
sess ability: 

1. From a given mechanical drawing of a 
simple object to make a freehand drawing of 
the appearance of the object in perspective. 

2. From a simple geometric form or con- 
structed object to make dimensioned freehand 
working drawings which furnish data sufficient 
for a finished instrumental drawing or for the 
construction of the object. 

3. From specifications to make a completed 
working drawing, freehand or instrumental, or 
a sketch of the appearance of the object. 

It should be stated here that outside of art and 
technical schools individuals are rarely found who 
measure up to the standards of the foregoing aims 
and requirements. 

II. Scientific Values. 

Attention was called in the introductory chap- 
ter to the fact that representative drawing is 
esteemed by many teachers as a useful device for 
securing analytical observation. This concep- 
tion of the value of drawing is more specifically 
disclosed in the following list of typical quotations 
from laboratory manuals and relevant literature: 



56 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

Spencer, Education, 1861. Drawing is "a 
means whereby still greater accuracy and com- 
pleteness of observation is induced." 

Johonot, Principles and Practice of Teaching, 
1878. "Drawing is of the highest use to all 
intellectually in inciting to correct observation." 

Bergen, Note-book to Accompany Botany 
Texts, 1904. "Sketch every thing that can be 
drawn, and then explain in writing all points 
not evident from the sketches." 

Ganong, The Teaching Botanist, 1900. "The 
very act of drawing will call attention to fea- 
tures otherwise overlooked." 

Maxwell, The New Course of Study, 1904. 
"Use drawing wherever possible and particu- 
larly in nature study, for there can be no proper 
study of these objects unless they are drawn. 
This is absolutely essential." 

Hardest, Laboratory Guide for Histology, 
1908. "In drawing one learns to practice habits 
of neatness and astuteness of observation." 

Conn, Biology, 1912. "In all cases where 
laboratory work is possible, students should be 
required to make careful drawings of the ob- 
jects." 

Curtis, Laboratory Directions in General 
Zoology, 1912. "Drawings are used solely as a 
means of enforcing exact observation and 
recording the results of the same." 

Bastin, Laboratory Exercises in Botany, 
1895. "They [drawings] are useful not only in 
explaining to others the structures observed, 
but they are in themselves great aids also to 
accurate observation, and are equally helpful in 



RELATION OF DRAWING TO DEVELOPMENT 57 

giving vividness and permanency to knowl- 
edge." 

Hall, The Teaching of Physics, 1913. "Prac- 
tice of the graphical method of record, by means 
of the simplest possible drawings, is of very 
great service; for it requires the pupil really to 
study his apparatus, and yet, by saving many 
words, may save his time as well as that of the 
reader." 

The use of drawing as a device for recording the 
work accomplished by the pupil is practically 
universal. 

Ganong, The Teaching Botanist, 1910. "He 
can not make even a passable scientific drawing 
or written description of an object until he has 
first seen it accurately and completely, and 
realized its construction." "For his purpose 
both drawings and descriptions are needed." 

Bigelow, The Teaching of Zoology, 1907. 
"The ideal record of laboratory work in zool- 
ogy consists of both drawings and notes." 

In spite of the common belief in the efficacy of 
representative drawing to secure analytical obser- 
vation, there is a growing realization among those 
who have given more thought to laboratory prac- 
tice that the purely representative drawing does 
not accomplish this purpose. 

Ganong, The Teaching Botanist, 1910. "It 
is essential for the teacher to realize that scien- 
tific drawing does not consist in the composi- 
tion of pictures correct in perspective and fine 



58 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

finish, but in the making of diagrammatic 
outlines which convey to the mind of the be- 
holder accurate conceptions of the real construc- 
tion of the object represented." 

Bigelow, The Teaching of Zoology, 1907. 
"Drawings, like the structures they represent, 
lend themselves chiefly to the training in ob- 
servation. For sound training in induction we 
must have notes . . . clearly written, logical 
accounts of observations, experiments, and 
conclusions." 

To these quotations should be added one of 
Luquet's conclusions. 1 

"For to set limits to the sense of observation, 
it is certain that in making the child draw one 
attracts his attention to motifs in which he was 
perhaps not interested by himself. But if we 
consider here drawing as an element of 'object 
lessons,' logical realism is infinitely more adapted 
to this role than visual realism, since it con- 
sists precisely in placing in the drawing all 
that is in the object, and to typify all of the 
elements, each with its exemplary form, and 
by logical realism the child in some way spon- 
taneously effects the dissection of the object 
which he reproduces." 

777. Relation of Drawing to Special and General 
Aptitudes. 

Many writers have called attention to the value 
of drawing as a means of studying the intellectual 



1 Luquet, Les Dessins d'un Enfant, pp. 250-51, 



RELATION OF DRAWING TO DEVELOPMENT 59 

development of the child. The spontaneous 
drawing in particular serves as a definite form of 
expression to reveal many conditions of the child's 
mental life and growth which are otherwise inac- 
cessible. Here, as with all children's drawings, it 
is unwise to build too much upon group collections 
unless augmented by the acts and remarks of the 
children while drawing and by series of drawings 
from the same children. 1 

The relation which exists between ability in 
drawing and ability in other subjects and other 
modes of expression is an interesting question 
which bears directly upon our general problem. 
The literature of drawing contains abundant com- 
ment concerning the relation of drawing to other 
subjects, as well as to general intelligence, but 
there is very little in the way of exact experimental 
investigation. 

>' Miss Elderton 2 compared 19 boys in the Fourth 
Form of an English public school as to abilities in 
Drawing and Classics and obtained a correlation 
of .416. With the same number of boys in the 
next higher form, the Remove, she obtained a 
negative correlation of — .313. Waiving criticism 
as to the manner of obtaining the original grades, 
the small number of subjects, nineteen, in this 



1 Rouma, Le Langage Graphique de l'Enfant, p. 157. 

2 Elderton, On the Association of Drawing with Other 
Capacities in School Children, Biometrika, 1909. 



60 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

study permits chance to play so large a part in 
the ultimate correlation discovered that the figures 
given are practically without value. 

The most pretentious attempt in this field is 
the study of M. Ivanof, 1 which embraces 9764 
drawings. The correlations were made according 
to age and not by grade in school. The valua- 
tion of the drawings was based upon three factors: 
(1) accuracy of proportions, (2) imaginative con- 
ception, (3) technical and artistic value. 

The individual drawings were graded from per- 
fect down to worthless on a scale of points: 6, 5, 
4, 3, 2, 1, and o. Each drawer was eventually 
classified from the average of four drawings graded 
separately into one of three groups: 

1. Good drawers (Average 6 or 5). 

2. Medium drawers (Average 4 or 3). 

3. Poor drawers (Average 2, 1, or o). 
Table I expresses the final results: 

The results shown in this table indicate that 
ability in drawing is positively correlated with 
general ability, particularly among the girls. The 
results are, however, open to criticism on account 
of the possible variability of the original grades in 
the various branches. These were obtained on 
the basis of the individual judgments of a number 
of different teachers and not by accurate psycho- 

1 Ivanof, Correlation entre l'Aptitude au Dessin et les 
autres Aptitudes, 1908. 



RELATION OF DRAWING TO DEVELOPMENT 6 1 

Table I 

Correlation Between Aptitude in Drawing and Work in General 

The figures show the percentage of pupils in each group who 
were strong students in general work. 



Strong Pupils 


Berne 


Geneve 


Neu- 
chatel 


Vaud 


( % among all pupils 

Boys -< % among good drawers. 
C % among poor drawers. 


33 
45 
29 


33 
40 

22 


34 
34 
15 


32 

54 
15 


( % among all pupils .... 

Girls -j % among good drawers. 

(. % among poor drawers. 


36 
6o 
30 


32 

48 

12 


39 

100 
22 


35 
68 
18 



logical tests. Moreover, the three factors used 
for grading the drawings are widely variable and 
afford a source for misinterpretation of the final 
results. Ivanof also estimated the correlation 
between drawing and a number of other school 
subjects. 

i. Drawing and Writing, (a) Of boys who 
are good in drawing, the percentage good in 
writing is higher and the percentage poor in 
writing is much lower than with the average of 
the pupils, (b) The correlation is less clear 
with the girls, since the percentage of good girl 
drawers who are poor in writing (18%) is prac- 
tically equal to the average (17%). (c) Includ- 
ing all, there is a positive correlation. 

2. Drawing and Geography, (a) Boys are 
more often better, and less often poorer, than 
girls, (b) There is a positive correlation between 



62 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

drawing and geography with both boys and 
girls. This correlation is easily explained, be- 
cause the study of geography involves the 
memory to a great extent. 

3. Drawing and History. Conclusion. It is 
not easy to explain the strong correlation which 
we have found between history and drawing. 
It may come from an indirect correlation; 
perhaps those good in history, like those good 
in drawing, are those who know best how to 
construct mentally the visual schemas of events, 
scenes, objects. 

4. Drawing and Calculation. The correla- 
tion is clearly present with the girls; it is less 
marked with the boys. With the pupils at 
Vaud the results are antagonistic. 

5. Drawing and Manual Arts. Large corre- 
lation present. This is easily explained. It 
implies many of the same physiological factors: 
exactness of the visual sense, precision in hand 
movements, aesthetic taste. 

6. Drawing and Language. Contradictory re- 
ports from canton to canton. Ivanof con- 
cludes the correlation is uncertain. 

7. Drawing and French Composition. The 
results show a positive correlation. 

All of the results above are open to a number 
of criticisms which will be discussed in greater 
detail in connection with a similar personal re- 
search. (See Chapter VI.) 

Kik, 1 in the course of his elaborate study of 
thirteen unusually talented drawers, makes the 

1 Kik, Die iibernormale Zeichenbegabung bei Kindern, 
1908. 



RELATION OF DRAWING TO DEVELOPMENT 63 

following statement with reference to the relation 
between talent in drawing and the degree of gen- 
eral intelligence: 

"It is easy to comprehend that mechanical 
copying as merely skill of hand has nothing to 
do with general intelligence and that a good 
copyist may be a poor scholar. In general, 
the pure copyists are weak pupils in the scien- 
tific branches. As the number of copyists is 
sufficiently large, and since they formerly ob- 
tained the best marks, one has been able to 
say, 'A good drawer is a poor scholar.' But in 
reality it is the statement of Kerschensteiner 
which is true: 'A great talent of graphic expres- 
sion is regularly associated with the child of 
good intelligence.' The activity of the memory 
and the imagination in drawing proves that it 
is intellectual work and that a great talent for 
drawing is always the sign of a developed intel- 
ligence. Experience demonstrates it. The good 
drawers show a good or satisfactory faculty for 
the scientific branches; they have certain strong 
subjects and certain weak subjects. Often the 
good drawers are strong in the natural sciences. 
Favored by their love of nature, they have ac- 
quired a mass of empirical knowledge and at- 
tend the lessons with interest. The drawers of 
imagination are excellent in style and obtain 
good marks in German; literature pleases them; 
there they find material for drawing. Preoc- 
cupied with concrete objects, they have a cer- 
tain weakness for the abstract sciences: mathe- 
matics, algebra, geometry. Finally, they are 
not brilliant in oral expression, habituated and 
tempted as they are to express themselves by 
drawing." 



64 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

Rouma 1 agrees with the general trend of these 
conclusions, but Albien, 2 after a careful experi- 
mental study of the drawing act, says: 

"The foregoing experiments give no confirma- 
tion to the thesis which Kerschensteiner up- 
holds: very great talent for graphic expression 
is positively correlated in children with good 
intellectual endowment. For the pupils in the 
foregoing attempts did not show equally not- 
able intelligence and good drawing talent. The 
most talented boy in drawing ranks 29 in a 
class of 46." 

These contradictory reports result in great part 
from different interpretation of the meaning of 
the word drawing. Ivanof includes under draw- 
ing factors of imagination and aesthetic interpre- 
tation, while Albien's experiments restrict draw- 
ing to pure representation. Kik specifically denies 
good intelligence to the copyist and claims it for 
the artist. It is probable that drawing, as an art, 
is characterized by some of the same factors 
which enter into "general intelligence," while 
drawing, as mere representation, is relatively 
specialized. The conclusions of two studies in 
general intelligence bear upon this question. 

Terman 3 tested seven of the brightest boys and 



1 Rouma, Op. cit., p. 198. 

2 Albien, Op. cit., p. 33. 

'Terman, Genius and Stupidity, Pedagogical Seminary, 
1906. 



RELATION OF DRAWING TO DEVELOPMENT 65 

seven of the dullest boys in a group of five hundred 
elementary school pupils in (a) powers of inven- 
tion and imagination, (b) mathematical ability, 
(c) mastery of language, (d) insight, (e) ease of 
learning the game of chess, (f) memory, and (g) 
motor ability. He concludes that the bright 
boys are superior to the dull boys in all mental 
tests and inferior in the motor. 

Simpson 1 investigated the correlation present in 
a variety of mental abilities which he groups 
roughly under the heads: sense-discrimination, 
motor control, efficiency in perception, efficiency 
in association, memory, and selective thinking. 
Upon the basis of his own and previous experi- 
ments Simpson concludes: 

"We find justification for the common as- 
sumption that there is a close interrelation 
among certain mental abilities, and conse- 
quently a something which may be called 'gen- 
eral mental ability' or 'general intelligence'; 
and that, on the other hand, certain capacities 
are relatively specialized, and do not neces- 
sarily imply other abilities except to a very 
limited extent." 

Whatever correlation may exist in general be- 
tween talent in drawing and other intellectual 
capacities, it is quite evident that there are num- 
erous individual cases where a high state of intelli- 



1 Simpson, Correlation of Mental Abilities, 1912. 



66 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

gence is not a sign of superior drawing ability. 
Not only is this true, but it is not particularly 
uncommon to find cases of extreme negative cor- 
relation between drawing ability and other mani- 
festations of intelligence. Rouma's 1 tests with 
weak-minded children show that subjects with 
feeble intelligence sometimes have very strong 
visual memories and make slowly achieved draw- 
ings which are remarkable in perfection of detail. 
In contrast to this, Stiehler 2 records that he has 
two sculptors in his Seminar practice school who 
have no ability in drawing whatever, and Meu- 
mann 3 describes an adult specialist in psychology 
whose drawings are entirely without represent- 
ative value. 



1 Rouma, Op. cit., p. 199. 

a Stiehler, Psychologie und Methodik des Zeichenunter- 
richts, p. 35. 

3 Meumann, Experimentelle Padagogik, III, p. 750. 



Chapter IV 

STUDIES IN THE ANALYSIS OF THE DRAW- 
ING PRODUCT 
I. Gross Products. 

Many investigators have been interested in the 
broad question of what children draw and numer- 
ous analyses of large collections of drawings have 
been made upon this basis. A typical example is 
the study of 1570 drawings by Mrs. Maitland. 1 
The drawings were obtained by asking children to 
draw what they pleased. The drawings were 
then collected and classified as shown in the fol- 
lowing table : 

Table II 
What Children Draw Spontaneously 

The figures indicate the number of children who drew the 
type specified at the various ages. 

Type 5-7 yrs. 8-10 yrs. 11-13 yrs. 14-15 yra. 

Human figure 45 40 8 5 

Animals 23 21 11 10 

Plants 35 30 17 11 

Houses 32 30 13 4 

Mechanical 8 13 1 1 8 

Still life 40 47 39 31 

Geometric design 5 12 28 37 

Ornament 3 3 4 8 

1 Maitland, What Children Draw to Please Themselves. 
67 



68 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

Levinstein 1 finds similar results in a gross analy- 
sis of several large collections of drawings. At 
early ages children prefer to draw the human 
form. As age increases, animals, plants, and 
diverse objects respectively gain a larger place in 
the drawings. In all cases it is the familiar animal 
or plant which receives the highest percentage of 
representation. 

On the other hand, Probst, 2 in a study of the 
spontaneous drawings of the native children of a 
Kabyle tribe in Algiers, finds that animals are 
drawn in preference to the human figure. Probst 
asserts that the matter of choice varies with the 
race and that it is dependent upon local tradition 
and environment. 

The evolution of the representation of the human 
figure affords material for the analysis of the 
development of a specific type. Lena Partridge 3 
has catalogued the variations of the different child 
ages in detail. 

These statistics indicate that there are a num- 
ber of well-marked general stages in the evolu- 
tion of the representation of the human figure. 
At early ages the child has little idea of form, 
proportion, or visual representation. The simple 
notions gradually include more and more detail 

1 Levinstein, Kinderzeichnungen. 

1 Probst, Les Dessins des Enfants Kabyles. 

3 Partridge, L., Children's Drawings of Men and Women. 



ANALYSIS OF THE DRAWING PRODUCT 69 

Table III 

What Children Draw in Representing the Human Form 
The figures give percentages of children at each age. 

Age3 4 s 6 78 9 10 11 12 13 

Body 50 82 92 93 98 99 98 99 ioo 100 

Feet 39 83 92 93 94 98 98 97 98 98 

Arms 45 67 71 80 76 75 93 90 95 95 

Neck 8 22 20 37 51 63 79 79 90 93 

Hair 6 26 27 32 38 58 70 65 73 82 

Beard I 12 15 12 18 34 40 36 60 51 

Feet profile... 15 54 66 73 78 87 83 85 79 85 

Nose profile. .. 6 34 46 65 76 79 81 81 77 76 

Body profile. . . 1 5 7 16 30 36 41 50 59 62 

Hat 32 57 59 76 78 81 84 89 85 80 

Buttons 30 37 37 52 55 66 64 81 79 83 

until approximately complete. The change from 
full-face representation to profile is a marked 
characteristic in the development of the human 
figure. 

Levinstein 1 makes similar generalizations from 
a large array of drawings. The biographical 
studies of Rouma 2 and Luquet 3 indicate that the 
representation of animal as well as human forms 
passes through a series of stages which appear 
successively. 



1 Levinstein, Op. cit. 

2 Rouma, Le Langage Graphique de l'Enfant. 

3 Luquet, Les Dessins d'un Enfant. 



70 THE PSYCHOLOGY of drawing 

Many students have been interested in the way 
in which children draw. There is a considerable 
mass of literature devoted to the study of the 
child's difficulty with the factors of time, orienta- 
tion, opacity, proportion, space, perspective, and 
movement. The majority of children master 
these problems in similar fashion. 

Rouma 1 distinguishes four stages of develop- 
ment in the representation of movement. 

1. The drawings are stereotyped, indicating 
merely that a man or an animal is being repre- 
sented. The child announces verbally what 
the motion is. "The man runs." 

2. The second stage shows movement by 
some form of relationship. A line is drawn 
from the stereotyped form of a dog to a house, 
which indicates that the dog is going to the 
house. 

3. The movement is partially indicated in 
the drawing. A raised leg, with the remainder 
of the figure stereotyped, shows that a man is 
running. 

4. The entire drawing depicts motion. 

The following table is taken from Rouma. The 
figures indicate the variation in representation of 
motion by ages. The tests were given to five 
classes in a Molenbeek school for girls. 



1 Rouma, Op. cit., pp. 86-104. 



ANALYSIS OF THE DRAWING PRODUCT 71 

Table IV 

Representation of Motion 

The figures indicate the number of children of different ages. 







First Grade- 


-33 


pupils 




Ages 


First Stage 


Second Stage 


Third Stage 


Fourth Stage 




Neutral 


Relative 




Partial 


Complete 


6 yrs.. . 


3 




15 







O 


7yrs... 







5 







O 


8 yrs.. . 


1 




5 




2 


O 


9 yrs.. . 


1 




1 




O 


O 




5 




26 




2 


O 






Fourth Grade- 


—26 pupils 




9 yrs... 












3 


I 


10 yrs.. . 







1 




3 


2 


11 yrs... 












2 


3 


12 yrs... 












3 


6 


13 yrs... 







1 







1 









2 




11 


13 



These statistics show that, while there is a gen- 
eral parallelism between advance in age and the 
ability to represent movement, there is great vari- 
ation among individual pupils. Different chil- 
dren of the same age appear in three different 
stages of drawing. 



•)2 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

Levinstein 1 tabulated 4943 illustrations of 
Hans Guck-in-die-Luft upon the basis of the 
manner of drawing. As a result he distinguishes 
two chief types of drawings. (1) Fragmentbilder 
(fragment-pictures) and (2) Erzahlungsbilder (nar- 
rative-pictures). The illustrations of a child of 
six years afford a pure example of the Fragment- 
bilder. No actual scene is represented, but the 
illustration is composed of isolated figures scat- 
tered over the paper entirely without organiza- 
tion. At older ages the children begin to produce 
the Erzahlungsbilder. The scenes of the story 
are now distinguished and arranged according to 
the sequence of the phrases of the story, a scene for 
each phrase in chronological order. Levinstein 
found that this type is begun at the age of 9 or 
10, and that at 11 or 12 it is the chief type of the 
children's illustrations. 

Rouma 2 made a similar test to satisfy himself 
of the true worth of Levinstein's conclusions. 
Rouma had the story of the Petit-Poucet related 
to the children as the scenes were shown by the 
cinematograph. He found that the Erzahlungs- 
bilder gradually displaced the Fragmentbilder in 
the children's illustrations according to the in- 
crease in age, but that it occurred at an earlier 



1 Levinstein, Op. cit. 

1 Rouma, Op. cit., p. 150. 



ANALYSIS OF THE DRAWING PRODUCT 73 

age than Levinstein had found. In addition he 
made a very significant discovery by asking some 
of the children who always drew Fragmentbilder 
to act out the story. He found that they could 
act out all of the scenes in complete detail. He 
then had them draw again, but they were unable 
to make other than the fragmentary illustrations. 
The fact that the children knew all about the 
story, but could not make the drawings, shows 
that the type of drawing does not indicate the 
child's knowledge. His physical behavior, there- 
fore, does not depend upon clear visual images of 
the scenes of the story. 

II. Stages in the Development of Drawing. 

We have seen that it is possible to distinguish 
a number of developmental periods in the mastery 
of graphic representation. The earlier students of 
children's drawings mark out three distinct per- 
iods in the growth of the normal child. Burk, 1 
for example, states that: 

"The progress of a child learning to draw is 
roughly divisible into three periods. 

"1. A period in which the movements are 
wholly muscular and are unguided by the 
visual centers in any degree; roughly, this 
period is that of the second and third years. 

"2. A period roughly between the fourth 



1 Burk, The Genetic versus the Logical Order in Drawing, 
1902, p. 321. 



74 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

year and the ninth or tenth, characterized by 
the first beginning of crude representation and 
slowly proceeding toward an interest to accur- 
ate drawing of objects as they are actually seen. 
"3. A period beginning with an interest in 
accurate representation of what the eye sees to 
the exclusion of associated ideas." 

The more recent analytical and biographical 
studies render it possible to characterize the 
development of drawing in greater detail. Both 
objective and subjective, standards determine the 
delimitation of the individual developmental 
periods. The objective point of view dominates 
the following differentiation. (After Kerschen- 
steiner and Meumann.) 

1 . P re-experimental Stage. The separate parts 
of the objects drawn are merely placed side by 
side. The little drawer represents his father or 
mother by placing the principal parts of their 
bodies side by side. The child does not really 
draw; he tells, describes, counts up what he 
knows. He has grasped the idea of graphical 
expression and seeks for a new form of expres- 
sion and communication. This stage extends 
nearly to the fourth year. 

2. Stage of the Schema. The drawing is 
schematic. The child's outlines of animals and 
various objects are not visual representations, 
but are symbolic reproductions of what the 
child knows. He does not attempt to show 
accurate details; is satisfied with rounding con- 
tours. The same or only slightly changed 



ANALYSIS OF THE DRAWING PRODUCT 75 

schema serves for a man or a woman. The 
animal schema is a man laid horizontally, with 
four legs added. The laws of opacity, per- 
spective, and space relations are not recog- 
nized. The child shows both exterior and 
interior of a house in the same drawing. 

3. Stage of Beginning Appreciation of Line 
and Form. The child makes his first attempts 
at coherent visual representation, but the 
imitative appearance still contains schematic 
features. This stage begins about the seventh 
year with gifted drawers, much later with the 
untalented, or is never reached. 

4. Stage of Representation According to Ap- 
pearance. The schema disappears from the 
drawing. The form of the representation is 
determined by the appearance of the object. 
The drawing is in outline; it makes no attempt 
at the reproduction of tri-dimensional space. 
Beginning with the eleventh year, a conspicuous 
percentage of children cultivate a number of 
means of representation of depth and plastic- 
ity. This introduces the final stage. 

5. Stage of Representation According to Tri- 
dimensional Form. The depth and plasticity of 
objects are now shown by means of proper 
regulation of light and shade, perspective, and 
foreshortening. This is the final stage, typical 
of the highest development of drawing. Many 
drawers do not reach this stage. 

The subjective standards of delimitation are 
based upon the development of individual chil- 
dren. Luquet's biographical study indicates that 



76 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

all individuals pass successively through four 
ages or phases of drawing. 1 

i. Involuntary Drawing. The child has per- 
ceived that the drawings of others represent 
objects and that he is able to trace lines for 
himself. He does not realize, however, that he 
can represent similarly with his own lines. He 
notes the accidental similarity of his drawings 
after he has made them and then calls atten- 
tion to "his" drawing. It is not yet an inten- 
tional creation. 

2. Synthetic Incapacity. The child deter- 
mines to represent the visual appearance of 
objects. From then on he varies only in his 
manner of expressing realism. In this stage he 
is overcome by diverse obstacles, the chief of 
which is his synthetic incapacity to assemble 
the different details which have gained his at- 
tention into a coherent whole. 

3. Logical Realism. This age is character- 
ized by logical realism. The child deliberately 
attempts to reproduce not only what he is able 
to see of an object, but all there is. He gives a 
typical form to each part. 

4. Visual Realism. In this stage the child 
arrives at visual representation, submitting 
with more or less lack of skill in execution to the 
principles of perspective. He has arrived, as 
far as drawing is concerned, to the period of 
the adult. 

The stages of graphic development are not a 
result of a completely independent development 

1 Luquet, Op. cit., p. 225. 



ANALYSIS OF THE DRAWING PRODUCT 77 

of the child ; imitation and teaching must be taken 
into consideration as adding or even interfering 
with the natural gifts. It is very possible to de- 
limit stages which show the degree of conformity 
to the ideals of instruction. 1 Thorndike 2 has 
constructed a scale which attempts to measure a 
child's achievement in drawiig. The scale is 
composed of fourteen typical drawings taken 
from Kerschensteiner's Die Entwickelung der Zeich- 
nerischen Begdbung. The fourteen sample draw- 
ings range in merit by approximately equal steps 
from o up to 17. The drawings of a child or of a 
class may be compared to the sample drawings of 
the scale and the degree of achievement estimated 
accordingly. 

Becterew 3 gives a list of ten objective character- 
istics by which children's drawings may be judged. 
The list includes such factors as the degree of 
regularity of lines, relative complexity, degree of 
imitation, time required for observation, coherence 
of related events, completeness of execution, 
creative power, permanent and temporary indi- 
vidual peculiarities. 

Whatever pedagogical values are derived from 
an analysis of the stages of drawing must take 

1 See Stiehler, Psychologie und Methodik des Zeichenun- 
terrichts, pp. 18-21. 

a Thorndike, The Measurement of Achievement in Draw- 
ing, 1913. 

* Becterew, Objektive Psychologie, 1913, p. 392. 



78 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

into consideration the individual child as well as 
the group. The individual child not only is 
likely to differ markedly from other children of 
his own age, but is variable in his own develop- 
ment. Periods of regress to former stages are 
frequent. Old schemas which have been dis- 
carded in favor of visual representation reappear 
for extended periods of time. The situation is 
further complicated by the common appearance 
of mixed stages in which the drawings of the 
child have characteristics from both earlier and 
later stages. Disposition, mood, and physio- 
logical condition affect the type of drawing. If 
interested and animated, the child uses one type 
of representation; if distrait or fatigued, another 
type. The calm, logical, positive child draws 
more exactly and talks less; the brilliant, imagina- 
tive child sketches freely and supplies the details 
orally. 1 As Luquet 2 says: 

"The theoretical distinction which we have 
indicated among the four ages of drawing is, in 
fact, much less sharp; each period is prolonged 
after the following period has commenced; in 
particular, not only with the child, but equally 
with the adult, more or less sporadic traces of 
logical realism persist in the drawings of indi- 
viduals who have arrived consciously to the 
phase of visual realism." 



1 Rouma, Op. cit., p. 134. 

2 Luquet, Op. cit., p. 228. 



ANALYSIS OF THE DRAWING PRODUCT 79 



III. Drawing as a Form of Language. 

The statement that "drawing is not an art for 
children, but a language" 1 is found in some form 
in practically every work on children's drawings. 
The earlier studies as usual give more attention 
to groups than to individuals. The following 
frequently quoted comparison is from Lukens: 2 

"The development of drawing should show 
the same stages as the development of speech 
— suggested as follows: 

Speech 

1. Automatic cries and re- 
flex or impulsive sounds. 

2. Imitation of sound, but 
without meaning; child bab- 
bles back when addressed. 

3. Understands words, but 
does not speak beyond such 
words as "mama," "papa," 
etc. 

4. Repeats words as mere 
sounds when they are said 
to him. 

5. Uses words to express 
his thoughts. 

6. Studies grammar and 
rhetoric. 



Drawing. 

1. Automatic and aimless 
scribble. 

2. Scribbling localizations 
and imitation of movements 
of other persons' hands. 

3. Understands pictures, 
but does not draw beyond 
the simplest localization of 
features by scribbling. 

4. Copies from others to 
see how to get the right ef- 
fects in the use of lines. 

5. Picture-writing, illus- 
trated stories, scenes, etc. 

6. Studies technique of 
drawing, perspective, pro- 
portion, shading, etc. 



1 Levinstein, Kinderzeichnungen, 1905. 
a Lukens, A Study of Children's Drawings in the Earlier 
Years, 1896. 



80 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

It is undoubtedly true that the first two stages 
mentioned above have a common basis in the 
impulses of play and imitation. From this point 
on the comparison loses its significance, because 
the characteristics given to the last four stages of 
drawing are not typical of its genetic development. 
The biographical studies of Luquet 1 show that 
during this period the development of drawing is 
characterized by the method of "expressing real- 
ism." Language, on the other hand, tends to 
become more and more abstract. 2 The child's 
free drawing is always individualistic, while his 
language is dominated by social convention. In 
the earlier stages there are many parallels between 
the two forms of expression. In the later stages 
drawing diverges in one direction toward the con- 
crete, while language diverges in another toward 
the abstract. This may be illustrated by refer- 
ence to studies in the racial development of draw- 
ing. 

Haddon's 3 biological study of the evolution of 
drawing shows that: 

"There are certain needs of man which appear 
to have constrained him to artistic effort; these 
may conveniently be grouped under the four 
terms of Art, Information, Wealth, and Relig- 
ion. 



1 See previous section. 

a Meumann, Experimentelle Padagogik, II, p. 693. 

8 Haddon, Evolution in Art, 1914. 



ANALYSIS OF THE DRAWING PRODUCT 81 

"Art. — Aesthetics is the study or practice of 
art for art's sake, for the sensuous pleasure of 
form, line, and color. 

"Information. — In order to convey informa- 
tion from one man to another, when oral or 
gesture language is impossible, recourse must be 
had to pictorial signs of one form or another." 
Here it is seen that drawing serves as a language 
when its chief purpose is primarily to convey 
information. Let us note what happens in the 
development of pictorial signs as a form of lang- 
uage. Haddon 3 gives the following stages: 

1. Pedographs. Pictures or actual repre- 
sentations of objects. 

2. Ideograms. Pictorial symbols, which are 
used to suggest objects or abstract ideas. 

Phonograms. Graphic symbols of sounds. 

3. Verbal Signs, representing entire words. 

4. Syllabic Signs, which stand for the articu- 
lations of which words are composed. 

5. Alphabetic Signs or Letters, which repre- 
sent the elementary sounds into which the 
syllable can be resolved. 

The development proceeds from the individual 
and concrete to the conventional and abstract. 
The pictograph is the individual's own representa- 
tion of the salient features of some object; the 
ideogram and the phonogram still carry something 
of visual appearance, but have become conven- 
tionalized by social repetition, while verbal, 
syllabic, and alphabetical signs have lost all 



82 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

semblance of visual representation. "The less 
the picture became like what it was intended to 
represent, the more useful it became as a means 
for conveying thought." 1 

Contrast with this the development of the 
child's drawing in our present social organization. 
(After Luquet and Kerschensteiner.) 

1. Synthetic Incapacity. Graphic juxtaposi- 
tion of what the child knows. 

2. Schemata. Symbolic representation of 
what the child knows. Conventionalized and 
generic. 

3. Visual Coherence. Imitates individual ap- 
pearance, but contains schematic features. 

4. Two-dimensional Representation. Visual 
representation which lacks perspective. 

5. Visual Realism. Perfect visual represen- 
tation of the individual object. 

The entire trend of drawing as representation is 
from the general and abstract toward the specific 
and concrete, just the opposite from the develop- 
ment of drawing as a form of language. It is 
evident from the above that drawing is most like 
language at the second stage, when symbolic or 
generic drawings are the rule. Luquet 2 questions 
the advantage of the achievement of artificial 
education in substituting visual for logical realism 



1 Haddon, Op. cit., p. 221. 

2 Luquet, Les Dessins d'un Enfant, p. 247. 



ANALYSIS OF THE DRAWING PRODUCT S3 

in drawing. The drawing which permits the 
exhibition of a series of facts in a condensed theater 
of action deserves serious consideration before 
being discouraged. 

It is undoubtedly true that the emphasis of our 
education upon the visual in drawing has dis- 
couraged children from continuing their efforts at 
logical drawing. It remains only in the incidental 
construction of the analytical drawing. It is 
here that drawing continues to parallel language. 
Analytical drawing is characterized by logical and 
generic representation. This fact is of importance 
to our consideration of laboratory procedure; it 
suggests why analytical drawing and description 
are relatively interchangeable and why either of 
these devices is preferable to representative draw- 
ing. 

Drawing presents its parallels to language before 
it yields to the domination of visual reality. 
Rouma 1 has made a detailed study of this early 
period of the child's life with reference to the 
drawing-language. He describes four general tend- 
encies which, with considerable individual varia- 
tion and complexity, appear in chronological 
order. A summary follows: 

1. Indicative Tendency. The child makes a 
mark and indicates orally what it means. Each 
sign stands for some unit in the total drawing. 

1 Rouma, Le Langage Graphique, pp. 131-154. 



I THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

The child draws a man and as she marks says, 
"This is the nose," "Here is the mouth," etc. 
Visual representation is entirely lacking in the 
pure type. The lines do not exteriorize, but 
seem to fix the characteristics in the mind of 
the child. 

2. Descriptive Tendency. Visual representa- 
tion enters into the drawings. The general 
form is greatly simplified, but fairly exact and 
the parts are relatively in proper position. The 
representation is semi-ideographic and shows in 
a descriptive way what the child knows about 
the object. 

3. Narrative Tendency. The child draws a 
number of diverse characters and representations 
which he unites into a story by oral comment. 
The drawings are partially indicative, but the 
child comprehends their representative value. 
In the earlier stages of this tendency oral state- 
ment plays the leading part ; later it is used only 
to unite the various scenes of the story. The 
drawings are general in character, the details 
being expressed orally. The individual draw- 
ings frequently are distinguished by a single 
characteristic attitude. The drawings seem to 
exteriorize the story and facilitate the narra- 
tive. 

4. The Drawing-Language at Its Height. Bet- 
ter technique and more sustained attention 
favor the composition of scenes. The child 
becomes animated. He speaks in a high voice. 
He completes the imperfections of his drawing 
orally, by gesture, by facial expression. His 
characters speak, move, have life. The indi- 
vidual lines have greater representative value, 



ANALYSIS OF THE DRAWING PRODUCT 85 

but there is a distinct tendency to simplify 
the drawing as a whole. The non-useful de- 
tails are reduced, while the characteristic fea- 
ture is frequently exaggerated. The child tends 
to conventionalize his drawings by progressive 
simplification when he uses the same charac- 
ters in successive scenes. 



Chapter V 

STUDIES IN THE ANALYSIS OF THE 
DRAWING ACT 

The analysis of the drawing product given in 
the preceding chapter calls attention to individual 
variations in the drawing ability, but fails to ex- 
plain the causes of difference. The present chap- 
ter gives a review of the results of recent attempts 
to make such an explanation upon the basis of an 
experimental analysis of the drawing activity. 

I. Analysis of the Act of Drawing {Albien 1 ). 

The complete act of drawing is composed of 
two major processes which are quite distinct. It 
consists of an optical-perceptual process and a 
motor-graphic part, each of which is composed of 
subordinate partial processes. In the optical- 
perceptual process the eye receives the sensory 
stimuli from the object in view and the mind 
assimilates the perceived impression on the basis 
of previously acquired experience with similar 
sensory material. In the motor-graphic process 
the hand is set in motion to reproduce the per- 
ceived and more or less worked over visual image 
of the original object. The partial processes 
which enter into the optical-perceptual part of 

1 Albien, Behalten und Wiedergabe einfacher Formen, 
1907. 

87 



88 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

the drawing activity show the following char- 
acteristics: 

i. Purely Optical Process. This includes the 
fixation of the eye upon the object and the imaging 
of the object upon the retina. 

2. Sensational Process. This embraces the pas- 
sive taking in of the specially disposed sensations 
of brightness, color, surface distributions, etc. 
It may also include the sensations of accompany- 
ing eye and hand movements. 

3. Awakening of Percepts Which Tend to be 
Present and Apperception. The previously ac- 
quired percepts of similar sensation complexes 
which are at hand become actual. The object is 
grasped in consciousness, recognized, identified, 
and interpreted as the particular object present, 

4. Assimilation. These apperceived ideas (3) 
assimilate immediately with the passively taken 
in impressions (2), causing them to become active 
in consciousness. 

5. Secondary Reproduction of Earlier Associa- 
tions. Reproductions of formerly acquired con- 
cepts and judgments of similar appearing objects 
enter the mind. The conceptual activity devi- 
ates somewhat from the object present and other 
ideas enter the mind and assimilate with the 
objective impression. These related ideas may 
fuse unconsciously into our interpretation of the 
perceived object, or they may assume a free rela- 
tion which leads to reflection by contrast and com- 



ANALYSIS OF THE DRAWING ACT 89 

parison and ultimately to our highest understand- 
ing of the object. 

6. Preconceived Observation. The five partial 
processes just defined are all modified by the or- 
iginal purpose of the observation of the object. 
If the purpose is to make a complete and thorough 
examination of the object, the activity of each of 
the elemental processes will be markedly different 
than if the making of a mere sketch be in mind. 
Through the preconceived purpose the whole 
process of perception is given a particular direc- 
tion, while from the countless number of possible 
concepts which rise in consciousness a definite 
selection is made. Attention directs itself pre- 
dominantly to that in the object which is in ac- 
cord with our purpose, whether we are conscious 
of its deviation or not. 1 

Such are the partial processes of the optical- 
perceptual part of the drawing act. Similarly, 
the motor-graphical part of drawing is composed 
of subordinate elements. The hand is controlled 
by three chief factors. 

1. Direction by the Optical Image. When the 
drawer looks away from the object of observa- 
tion (and always, of course, when he is drawing 
from memory), his hand is guided more or less 
by the visual image which is retained in memory. 
This is, moreover, always an inwardly worked 

1 Judd and Cowling, Studies in Perceptual Development, 
Psychological Review, 1897. 



90 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

over image, subject to the influence of any one 
or all of the optical-perceptual partial processes. 
Some drawers examine the object carefully for 
several moments, study it more or less analytically, 
then draw from the retained image without 
further looking at the object. Other drawers 
revive their waning image by frequently recurring 
glances at the object. 

2. Kinesthetic Control. The hand is controlled 
in its particular movements by the immediate 
kinesthetic sensations and by images of previous 
sensations. Previous experience in drawing sim- 
ilar lines gives the needed muscular control. The 
kinesthetic images of the eye or hand movements 
made during the period of observation may also 
share in the subjective control of the hand. 

3. Control by Watching Results. The appear- 
ance of the developing drawing is used as a means 
for conscious comparison with the appearance of 
the original object. The wayward lines are cor- 
rected or directed accordingly. 

It is important to note, as Albien has empha- 
sized, that the preceding optical-perceptual pro- 
cess of drawing varies individually in its composi- 
tion, its components, and the significance for the 
whole process. With one individual analytical 
observation is partial and inexact. Another ob- 
serves but few details, but observes these details 
minutely. One individual quickly gives over to 
the play of his secondary associations or reflec- 



ANALYSIS OF THE DRAWING ACT 91 

tions, while another adheres more closely to the 
given objective impressions and makes but little 
individual interpretation. 

As with the individual behavior of the percep- 
tual part of the act of drawing, so are the indi- 
vidual processes which control the hand. With 
one drawer the hand is guided more by the visual 
image, while with another it is guided by the 
assistance of the imagination or reflection. With 
one individual the hand follows point by point 
the exact analytical observation of the object. 
With another it follows the schema acquired 
from some similar object. Finally, with indi- 
viduals of strong motor inclination, the motor 
images of the eye or hand movements may equal 
or for a time predominate over the visual image. 

These general considerations of drawing which 
rest upon experimental analysis show that correct- 
ness and originality in the execution of drawing 
may depend upon extraordinarily varied factors. 
It now remains to discuss the manner in which 
these partial processes act together in different 
individuals. Individual drawers may be classi- 
fied by the difficulties which they encounter in 
the act of graphic representation, or by the gifts, 
which they possess for successful drawing. 

II. Perceptual Development {Judd and Cowling 1 ). 
Judd and Cowling 2 find that subjects attempt- 
ing to reproduce a simple figure after an exposure 

x Op. cit. 

2 See Chapter II for method. 



92 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

of ten seconds exhibit two types of perceptual 
development. One type gets an early mastery of 
the general form and a later mastery of the de- 
tails. The second type begins immediately to 
master the details of the figure to the temporary 
neglect of the general form. This same experi- 
ment gives striking evidence of the complexity 
of the perceptual process and of the variations 
existing among different individuals. It is very 
significant that repeated exposures and continued 
analytical study is necessary before the percep- 
tion of a simple figure is mastered. Correct 
temporary memory of one part of the figure be- 
comes vague when attention is directed to another 
part. 

III. Drawing Types (Albien 1 ). 

Albien's carefully conducted experiments 2 indi- 
cate that wide variations exist between individual 
drawers, who tend to approach more or less closely 
one of two sharply distinguished extreme types. 

i. Visual Type. Appears in many gradations 
according to the share played by apperception. 
This type has a clear visual image and holds more 
to the direct objective impressions. There are 
two chief sub-types: 

(a) The subject perceives a clear visual 
image, but permits apperception and associa- 

x Op. cit. 

2 See Chapter II, 



ANALYSIS OF THE DRAWING ACT 93 

tion to enter little or not at all into activity. 
The image is therefore transitory. The subject 
may be a good copy drawer, but fails to draw 
well from memory. 

(b) The subject has a clear visual image. He 
assimilates the impression and seeks through 
analysis and subsequent synthesis to make the 
impression conspicuous. This subject is a good 
drawer. 

2. Constructive Type. The subject has a visual 
image which is but little imprinted. He depends 
upon reflection and subjective construction for 
the (memory) drawing. The original image is 
altered in the drawing. The success of the draw- 
ing depends upon the subject's mental power for 
correct association and reflection. If not accom- 
panied by analytical observation, the drawing is 
a failure. 

Samples of the above types may be shown by 
giving the reactions of several of the subjects of 
Albien's research. 

1. Extreme Visual Type. Franz G., 9 years. 
Ranks 29 in a class of 49. 

Very lively, enters into the experiment with 
great zeal. Attempts to draw a figure which 
has been exposed ten seconds with his eye held 
upon the fixation point in the center of the 
figure. Interesting to observe how he stops 
abruptly after the first stroke and draws no 
further. "The image has disapppeared." He 
draws with rapid, precise strokes. He observes 



94 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

a figure at his leisure, then draws it from mem- 
ory. Says, "The image hangs in my head." 
He retains the "whole image" very well. Num- 
erous objects such as a barometer, vase, kaleido- 
scope, etc., are exposed for ten — fifteen — twenty- 
five seconds. Franz retains the characteristic 
form and draws it without reconstruction. 
Looks often in the distance while drawing. 
Subject is markedly visually gifted and does 
not help himself through construction. 

2. Constructive Type with Some Visual Endow- 
ment. Paul T., 9 years. Ranks 5 in a class of 
49. 

Gives precise answers to all questions. "I 
cannot do that." "I do not see sufficiently for 
that." Thinks long before he begins to draw 
(up to two minutes) ; then draws slowly, but 
with rapid, precise strokes. For one memory 
drawing he observes 170 seconds; for the other 
two, relatively a short time. During the draw- 
ing from the model his eye wanders back and 
forth. During the study he makes automatic 
movements with the hand. Sees resemblances 
in the forms of the copy to objects with which 
he is familiar. He is an example of the con- 
struing type who helps himself considerably by 
his knowledge. He declares, "he marks how 
the lines and strokes lie." The drawings are 
good. 

3. Extreme Constructive Type. Karl Sch., 15 
years. First in general intelligence in a class of 
43- 



ANALYSIS OF THE DRAWING ACT 95 

The performance of this pupil with good intel- 
ligence (first of forty-three) is poorer than that 
of many younger children with weak intelli- 
gence. In the drawing after fixed seeing he 
first gazes in the distance. One can see from 
the movements of the muscles of his eyes and 
forehead that he is meditating. Upon ques- 
tioning he states that he is reflecting upon the 
relations. He does not succeed with the mem- 
ory drawing; an argument that he has no visual 
image and that his mental power is unable to 
supply the deficiency through reflection. When 
he makes the drawing from the model he draws 
precisely and in a shorter time. Upon ques- 
tioning he says that he forms the drawing by 
combination of the separate parts, reflects on 
the relations, and thinks of similar appearing 
objects. Makes four successive attempts to 
draw the same figure after ten-second exposures 
with eyes on a fixation point. Fails each time. 
The subject is of the constructive type with 
weak optical endowment. 

Albien compared his subjects by means of 
tachistoscopical reading tests with Messmer's 
objective and subjective reading types. 1 He 
Objective Type Subjective Type 

1. Rigid fixation. 1. Fluctuating attention. 

2. Relatively small scope of 2. Relatively large scope of 

attention. attention. 

3. Attention directed to 3. Attention directed to in- 

periphery. terior. 

4. Objective fidelity. 4. Subjective interpretive 

tendency. 



1 Messmer, Zur Psychologie des Lesens bei Kindern und 
Erwachsenen. 



96 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

announces marked similarities between the visual 
drawing type and Messmer's objective type, 
and between the constructive drawing type and 
Messmer's subjective type. The German word 
kriegfiihrenden was exposed successively by means 
of a tachistoscope for a fraction of a second. 
The subjects endeavored to write the word, or as 
much of it as possible, immediately after each 
exposure. The results follow: 

Paul E., Constructive Type. Franz G., Visual Type. 





-kriegfiihrenden- 


I. 


kriegfordern 


i- -g 


2. 


kriegfahren 


2. -r.g.- 


3- 


kriegfordern 


3- -fur- 


4- 


kriegfordern 


4. -fiir.r- 


5- 


kriegfarchen 


5. kr.-fu- 


6. 


kriegfiihren 


6. kr-g- 


7- 


kriegfuhren 


7. -fiihr-en 


8. 


kriegfarchen 


8. h-g fiihr-k 


9- 


kriegfnrchen 


9. krieg- 


10. 


kriegfurden 


10. krieg-r 


ii. 


kriegfiireln 


Thinks he can make 


12. 


kriegfahrnden 


nothing further out 


13- 


kriegfarden 


of it. 


14. 


kriegfuhren 




15- 


kriegfiihrenden 





Albien insists that thorough observation does 
not depend upon objective exactitude alone, but 
rather upon the relation set up between the 
objectively given impression and the conceptual 



ANALYSIS OF THE DRAWING ACT ctf 

assimilation which follows immediately. If the 
associations and ideas which come about by re- 
flection crowd out or misconstrue the objective 
impressions, the resultant percept and eventual 
drawing will be faulty and untrue. Thus the 
pure constructive type gives himself over too soon 
to subjective interpretation without at first seeing 
clearly. The pure visual type permits his com- 
prehension to be circumscribed by the objective 
characteristics of the object so that he fails to 
perceive it in the light of his previous knowledge. 
The best type of observation for purposes of 
drawing (or, as we shall emphasize later, for 
purposes of scientific interpretation) is based upon 
a proper union of objective seeing and subjective 
contemplation. 

IV. Difficulties in Drawing (Meumann 1 ). 

A large share of present literature takes the 
common point of departure that difficulties in 
drawing arise from two causes. The poor drawer 
cannot see correctly, or he fails in skill of hand. 
Meumann calls attention to the fact that he has 
found individuals who possess excellent sight and 
great skill of hand who cannot draw. Meumann 
gave a number of experimental tests 2 to determine 
the causes of individual variation in drawing. 
He found many causes for poor drawing and a 
number of types of drawers. 

1 Meumann, Experimentelle Padagogik. 
* See Chapter II. 



" 9§ THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

The "seeing" of most men who are not painters 
or drawers by occupation is in no manner an 
analyzing and discerning seeing. 1 The object of 
their seeing is not that of making themselves 
reliably trustworthy with the form and colors of 
objects, but at best only to recognize the things, 
to connect the objects with the words commonly 
used in naming them, or to learn to know with 
certainty the characteristics of things needful for 
the practical employments of life. Few realize 
how inaccurate is their knowledge of the form 
and color of the most familiar objects. Ask them 
to draw a postage stamp or the picture of a friend 
from memory, and they assert that they know 
the thing sufficiently, but cannot draw it. Chal- 
lenge them then to describe the appearance of 
the stamp, and for the most part, to their sur- 
prise, they fail lamentably. What is the cause of 
these failures? This question may be best 
answered by presenting a list of the difficulties 
found in memory drawing. 

It should be noted here that the memory is 
involved in drawing even when the object is in 
sight. The drawer must keep the mental image 
in mind at least while actually drawing. He, of 
course, keeps the mental image from disappear- 
ing or changing greatly by constant return to the 
object. Unless he can get the general outline of 

1 Meumann, Op. cit., p. 719. 



ANALYSIS OF THE DRAWING ACT 99 

the object fairly well imaged and retained in 
memory, he is very likely to have the not uncom- 
mon difficulty of being unable to make the de- 
tailed parts of his drawing fit into a uniform 
whole. The following difficulties come to light 
most clearly during attempts at memory drawing. 

1. The will to see analytically has not been 
aroused. In the case of most drawers who have 
never received drawing instruction, the will for 
careful notation of the specific form and colors of 
things is not present. 

2. In spite of the will to see analytically the 
drawer cannot make a correct analysis. He 
lacks the power of discrimination between the gen- 
eral setting and the minor details. 

3. Defective visual memory images. The 
drawer has a deficient sense of form, particularly 
as to indistinctness and incompleteness. Despite 
exhaustive observation, he retains no definite 
visual memory of form, color, or space situations. 

4. Lack of ability to hold the visual memory 
image in attention while drawing. When the 
drawer turns his attention to the act of drawing, 
the mental image becomes dim or disappears 
entirely. 

5. Lack of co-ordination of the visual image 
with the execution of the drawing movements. 
The drawer cannot guide the hand according to 
the dictates of the visual image. 



loo THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

6. The memory image is disturbed by the 
sight of the beginning drawing and by the incon- 
gruity between this and the design existing in 
the imagination of the drawer. This is common 
with unpracticed drawers. 

7. The lack of acquired drawing designs (sche- 
mata). The trained drawer acquires a mass of 
schemata by which he can produce a schema of an 
animal, a flower, or a house, quickly upon paper. 
This serves as a support for the representation of 
his memory images and he gradually modifies 
the schema until it corresponds to that which he 
would express. Many drawers who are deficient 
in schemata and can draw well from another 
drawing cannot draw from an object. 

8. Lack of dexterity or skill of hand. The 
drawer is unable to make a straight or curved 
line satisfactorily. 

9. Lack of knowledge of the projection of tri- 
dimensional space upon a flat surface. 

10. Defective artistic sense interferes with the 
individualistic aesthetic treatment of drawing. 

11. These defects may be found in different 
combinations in different individuals. 1 

V. Types of Retention (Meumann 2 ). 
Finally, we may examine certain types of re- 
tention in drawing. No two individuals are 

1 Meumann believes that 2, 3, 4, and 5 are defects of 
nature and that the others are due to training. 

2 Op. cit. 



ANALYSIS OF THE DRAWING ACT 101 

exactly alike, but it is possible as well as profit- 
able to describe a number of characteristic types 
of retention in drawing. Whether we are inter- 
ested in drawing from the aesthetic, the repre- 
sentative, or the scientific point of view, accurate 
knowledge of the type of retention of the pupil is 
of the greatest importance. The following analy- 
sis is based upon Meumann's experiments with 
eleven adults. 1 

1. The completedly untrained drawer. The 
subject has few drawing concepts and shows con- 
spicuously that a certain knowledge of the pure 
technique of drawing, regardless of all endowment, 
is necessary. Some idea of the manner of repre- 
sentation is necessary before an actual "drawing" 
can be produced. The subject draws a pure 
schematic sketch and cannot represent other- 
wise. This type of drawing resembles that of 
many young children and that of primitive peoples. 

2. The subject (drawing from memory) supports 
himself exclusively by the image of the object 
without supplementing this by additions accord- 
ing to his knowledge or conjecture. The drawing 
is incomplete, but rests upon absolutely pure 
visual retention. 

3. Similar to the preceding type, save that the 
image is supported by knowledge and reflection. 

x See Chapter II. 



102 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

If the perspective course of the lines is not clear 
in the visual image, it is reconstructed in thought. 

4. This type has such a weak visual memory 
that he yields completely to reflection and con- 
struction of the object. 

5. The subject possesses numerous drawing 
schemata. He knows objects similar to the object 
and for the most part works with them. Thus 
he does not represent the individual character- 
istics of the original objects. His drawing tech- 
nically is very complete. (It seems that profes- 
sionally trained drawers incline to this type of 
retention.) 

6. This type, like the child, gets a completed 
schema at once from the object. It is, however, 
generic, not specific. He draws a general cigar 
box, not the one before him. 

7. The specifically artistic type. He charac- 
terizes his drawings through a habitual leaning to 
the artistic working of the object. He seeks upon 
this basis to get a certain aesthetic effect out of 
the object. This tendency may show itself in 
unskilled drawers and is relatively independent 
of skill of hand and acquired schemata. 

8. Finally, is the subject who draws better from 
memory than after the model. He depends upon 
his numerous visual memory images. He has 
formed the habit of impressing himself with the 



ANALYSIS OF THE DRAWING ACT 103 

visual appearance, or he possesses that exceptional 
"adventitious retention" in high degree. 

Karrenberg 1 found that children of nine and ten 
years of age under the influence of systematic 
training were enabled to double their ability in 
representative drawing. 



1 Karrenberg, Der Mensch als Zeichenobject, 1910. 



PART III 
EXPERIMENTS AND CONCLUSIONS 



Chapter VI 
THE EXPERIMENTS 

Attention was called in Chapter I to the fact that 
laboratory work in science teaching has three 
aims: the observation of material, the making of 
records, and the retention of learning, and that it 
furthers these aims by three devices: represent- 
ative drawing, description, and analytical drawing. 
The determination of the character of the various 
interrelations of these factors, and the psycho- 
logical analysis of drawing were set as the prob- 
lems for ultimate solution. The intervening sur- 
vey of the literature of drawing has been devoted 
to the psychological setting of these two prob- 
lems. The present chapter will present a series of 
special experiments which have been organized to 
complete the analysis of the various factors of 
laboratory teaching. 

Experiment I. Representative Drawing, 
Description, and Diagrammatic Drawing. 

i. Problem. To evaluate the correlation be- 
tween ability in representative drawing and abil- 
ity in description and diagrammatic drawing. 

2. Method of Procedure. The special tests used 
for this problem were selected after numerous pre- 
liminary trials which were necessary to adjust 

107 



108 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

them to time limitations and to eliminate direc- 
tions which were liable to misinterpretation. It 
was necessary to select objects for the various tests 
which were approximately equally well known to 
the different subjects, which afforded a range of 
difficulty adapted to grading, and which could be 
finished at a single sitting. 

Test No. i. Subjects. 51 students in a first- 
year high school class in General Science. 

A turkey feather (see Figure 1) was selected 
for this test. It serves as a good object for draw- 
ing and description, while its finer structure is 
unknown and of sufficient intricacy to require a 
satisfactory amount of ingenuity for study and 
diagramming. Parts of the feather were mounted 
on microscopic slides and focused under a number 
of microscopes in such a way that the detail of 
the feather was equally manifest to each subject. 
The following preliminary statement was made to 
the class at the beginning of a regular laboratory 
period : 

"You will be given a test today to compare 
your abilities in drawing, description, diagram- 
ming, and laboratory analysis. The work will 
be counted as a regular day's work in elementary 
science, but, as different classes are to be com- 
pared, you are asked to do your best." 

Each pupil was then given a feather, pencil, 
rubber, paper, and a sheet of directions for the 
first part of the test. At the end of the given 



F 




s 





Figures I to IV. 



THE EXPERIMENTS III 

time the first records were collected and directions 
passed for the second part of the test. The four 
parts of the test were given in an eighty-minute 
period. All of the tests were given under my 
personal direction. The directions, which were 
given out one part at a time, follow: 

Part I. Drawing. (Materials: eraser, pencil, 
and drawing paper.) 

Write your name and the number of your 
feather at the top of the page of drawing paper. 

Place the feather in position as directed and 
make a careful drawing of it. (Time allowed, 
13 minutes.) 

Part II. Description. (Materials: pen, ink, 
and ruled paper.) 

Write your name and the number of the 
feather at the top of the page. 

Without tearing or pulling the feather apart 
in any way, study it carefully and describe it so 
as to explain as much as possible about the 
feather to a person who had never seen one. 
(Time allowed, 12 minutes.) 

Part III. Dissection and Analysis. (Materials: 
same as II.) 

Write your name at the top of each page of 
paper used. 

Pursue carefully the following directions and 
answer the questions as they appear. Do not 
write anything except the answers. 

Examine the feather again and note that it is 
composed of a central axis or quill and an ex- 
panded, flattened part called the web or vane. 
The quill is divided into two parts: (a) the 



H2 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

hollow, rounded, transparent barrel, which is 
the end of the feather that is attached to the 
body of the bird, and which has no attached 
parts, and (b) the shaft, which has the vane 
attached to its sides. Examine the surface of 
the vane with a lens and note that it is com- 
posed of a series of side branches of the shaft 
which lie closely parallel to one another. These 
side branches are called barbs. 

Question I. In what direction do the barbs 
run with reference to the shaft? (Time al- 
lowed, 10 minutes.) 

After having answered Question I, tear one 
of the barbs loose from the barbs in front of 
and behind it. Observe that it is similar to 
the one which has been mounted for micro- 
scopical examination. Examine the mounted 
barb under the low power of the microscope and 
note that the barb has a long, narrow body with 
two opposite rows of small, more or less united, 
branches attached to it. These fine branches of 
the barbs are called barbules. Note that the 
barbules in the row on the upper side of the 
barb have a number of smaller branches or out- 
growths, which gives the barbule something of 
a bushlike appearance. These smaller out- 
growths are called hooks, because some of them 
have little hooks at the end. The barbules in 
the row on the lower side of the barb do not 
possess these smaller branches. Taking the 
feather as a whole, then, there are in turn a 
shaft with barbs on either side; each barb with 
a row of barbules on either side and every upper 
barbule with a number of hooks. 



THE EXPERIMENTS 113 

Question 2. If each of the barbules possess- 
ing hooks averaged 10 hooks each, how would 
you estimate the total number of hooks on a 
feather? (Time allowed, 10 minutes.) 

Having answered Question 2, pull two barbs 
apart slowly and watch carefully what happens. 
Examine the prepared mount of a section of the 
vane, in which some of the barbs have been 
partly torn apart. Examine the torn part and 
other parts of the vane in this mount under the 
low power of the microscope. Note again that 
the upper row of barbules terminates in clusters 
of hooks, while the barbules running back into 
them from the barb just ahead do not have the 
hooked branches. 

Question 3. Explain in detail how the barbs 
are held together. (Time allowed, 15 minutes.) 

Part IV. Diagram. (Materials: eraser, pen- 
cil, and drawing paper.) 

Write your name at the top of the page. 

Make a diagram (several, if necessary) show- 
ing the relative arrangement of the shaft, the 
barbs, the barbules, and the hooks. Label it 
carefully. (Time allowed, 15 minutes.) 

Test No. 2. Subjects. 

Group 1 : 48 university graduate students. 

Group 2: 50 university undergraduate students. 

Group 3 : 30 university undergraduate students. 

Group 4: 31 university undergraduate students. 
Total, 159. 

Test No. 2 is essentially a repetition of the parts 
of Test No. 1 which measure ability in represent- 



114 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

ative drawing and description. The single varia- 
tion is in the use of a different object for copy. 
Each member of Group I was given similar draw- 
ing materials and an object which was unfamiliar 
to his or her drawing and describing experience. 
The object was a small metal spring-clip (see 
Figure 2) taken from the stage of a compound 
microscope. The students were directed as fol- 
lows: 

Part I. Write your name at the top of the 
page of drawing paper. Place the object in the 
exact position as directed and make a careful 
drawing of it. (Time allowed, 7 minutes.) 

Part II. Write your name at the top of the 
page of drawing paper. Make a careful written 
description of the object. (Time allowed, 7 
minutes.) 

The members of Groups 2, 3, and 4 followed 
similar directions, using different objects to 
copy. Each member of Groups 2 and 3 was 
given a flat, triangular, metallic object (see 
Figure 3) which will be referred to as the "tri- 
angle." Each member of Group 4 was given a 
small metallic sash-lift (see Figure 4). In every 
case one drawing and one description of the same 
object were made by each subject. 

3. Methods of Scoring. As the validity of the 
correlation established between any two traits 
depends upon the accuracy of the original meas- 
urements, great care has been used to insure exact 



THE EXPERIMENTS 1 15 

scoring of the results of these experiments. Ten 
competent markers co-operated in scoring the 
various tests. They first became thoroughly 
familiar with the various tests by taking them. 
They were then carefully instructed in the system 
of grading, and means were taken to insure de- 
liberate and painstaking work. It is believed that 
ten such judges are of greater value than a much 
larger number selected from a group of persons 
who are strange to the tests and more or less indif- 
ferent to the results. The procedure involved 
the ranking of the individual members of each 
group serially in order of the merit of their efforts. 
Thus it was necessary to discover which one of 
the 51 high school pupils was best in drawing, 
which one was second, and so on down to the 
poorest. 

(a) Method of Scoring Drawings. Each draw- 
ing was compared directly with every other draw- 
ing of the same group. At each comparison the 
drawing which was superior was graded '1,' and 
the drawing which was inferior, '2.' When all 
had been compared, the marks for each drawing 
were summed and the total recorded. This was 
done by each of the ten markers and the final 
total recorded for each drawing. Thus each draw- 
ing in a group of 50 was compared with the other 
49 by ten different judges and received a final 
mark on the basis of 490 individual compari- 



ii6 21 I THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

sons. The drawing having the lowest total, i. e., 
the most grades of %' was ranked best; the one 
having the greatest total was ranked poorest, 
while the remaining drawings were ranked in 
between according to the size of their total score. 
The markers were instructed not to grade 
"ties," but at each comparison to grade one 
superior and the other inferior. This was not pro- 
ductive of any considerable difficulty and insured 
the use of greater discrimination on the part of 
the judges. It was found convenient to tally 
according to the score-card shown on page 117. 
The score-card exhibited here was prepared for a 
group of 30 drawings. In scoring, the drawings 
in this case were numbered 1 to 30. Drawing 
No. 1 was scored by comparison with each of the 
other 29. At every comparison the two drawings 
concerned were scored '1' and '2' in the squares 
opposite their numbers on the tally sheet. Draw- 
ing No. 1, having been compared with the others, 
was then laid aside and No. 2 compared with the 
remaining 28. No. 3 was then compared with 
the remaining 27, and so on until none remained. 
Thus the score-card registers individual compari- 
sons as well as totals and affords a complete record 
of all that was done. The score-card on page 118 
shows the final rankings as given by the ten judges 
for this group. 



THE EXPERIMENTS 



117 



tOCtlflNH t^VD lO^M O \0 O VO O^OO rt- cN t^MOH O C300 00 t~» C\ C\ Th 

NNN M M CO M0» WMMWMMMWI-INCIMI-I 



mhhmn h( (HNhmhhnhhhhhhhhnm«hnn w 

HHNNH HH HHMNMM«HHHNHHHH«NN 0) M CN l-H 

MMNIHW M |_,MCNI-HC^MMCNl-tMHHIHIHI-4IHIHI-l N H (| CI H H 

WMP10>N|_iN M(V > l ~'N MM Nt-ll-(>-l>-tMI--IIHI-l CNMWNCNMII 

i-ii-iOCSlC^i-ii-it-iCSi-icMMMniHMiHCSNNN M«NWNC1«n 
mi-icNCNNihihihMi-inmmcNihihihmw hhNNNNNNNh 

HHMPlN H f|HWMNHHMHHHH N«mNNNNNNN« 

i-ii-iOCNCNmNWM'-iCNmmcNmmi-i NMNhN«nh((nnn 
MMNN«nci««HNtltlNN« NNNNNftMNNNNON 
mwnocNmcN | - | W m W | - , ^NM wMWOWNtNCNNNNOMN 
wi-iNNNNN'-'NiHtMiHNN HHNN«Hfl«NNNMN«N 

hhmn«hnhNhMh NhhhnnnnnNNNNNNNh 
i-iHNMNfiNHNHM NNNNHNNNNNNNNNNNNN 

MWW«N«NN« NNNMNNWWNN«MCIflW««M«« 

HH-hHCtMMMMM MNMMCNI-IWI-HI-ltHI-tMh-IIHI-lNMCNCNwP-l 

i-ii-icSWNi-iin CNwNCNONNWi-ioOMOMCNCNCNMMOPJtN 

WI-ICNWMlH Ht(HNHHNHHHHHNH«H«NNNNHH 

HM«NN NNNHWH«MHNH«flN«««Nf)NN«NN 

M M CI N MMI-lMl-lNMIHC^IHMIHMIHMMIHI-lOCSCNNC^MI-l 

H H N Mh-ll-lMOMMI-IIHMIHIHI-IHIIHIHMIHMOt»>HCMMC(M 

O WWCNNWNN M NNCNCNNNCN0INC40«NNC»C>I0IWC)CNCN 

HNNNflpiNNHMNNN«OINNNNM««N««NN«« 

w N rOTf-iOvO t^.00 0>0 h « tOrhiOVD f^oo 0*0 h n co^iOVO r^OO On O 



Ii8 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

Sample of Final Score for a Set of 30 Sash Lifter Draw- 
ings 

Total Final 

No. TA KO SM PS LH HM LN HN AC AA Points Rank 

1 31 35 32 38 36 39 32 33 37 38 35* 6 

2 30 35 37 38 35 35 36 36 37 3i 350 5 

3 53 43 30 37 34 45 51 43 32 36 404 " 

4 49 48 54 50 45 50 49 46 50 53 494 23 

5 48 49 45 55 48 38 46 39 54 48 470 19 

6 35 3i 30 35 36 34 31 35 34 32 343 4 

7 45 49 56 55 49 40 54 55 41 46 49° 22 

8 34 31 34 41 30 29 33 30 33 40 334 3 

9 5i 5i 50 47 44 45 46 45 50 50 479 20 

10 29 35 37 36 33 42 34 36 41 30 353 7 

11 58 58 58 58 58 58 58 58 58 58 580 30 

12 34 33 44 33 33 33 43 34 34 36 361 8 

13 39 40 47 46 43 36 40 37 45 46 419 14 

14 54 55 49 48 53 50 5<> 54 53 49 515 26 

15 37 38 39 4i 46 43 42 45 39 38 408 12 

16 36 32 34 30 33 30 33 3i 31 35 325 1 

17 32 41 43 39 41 37 33 40 42 40 388 10 

18 41 40 36 36 37 42 35 39 41 37 384 9 

19 41 46 46 45 47 51 50 45 46 42 459 17 

20 45 42 38 32 50 51 49 33 39 54 437 16 

21 42 42 41 42 39 40 40 41 41 41 409 13 

22 40 41 46 36 50 43 45 37 49 41 428 15 

23 47 52 42 54 38 49 51 53 39 43 468 18 

24 51 48 53 5i 54 54 53 49 52 53 518 27 

25 56 50 55 54 54 53 5i 54 55 54 536 28 

26 47 29 31 29 29 31 30 46 30 30 332 2 

27 55 56 55 55 54 5i 54 55 52 55 542 29 

28 57 55 42 47 44 54 54 45 43 56 497 24 

29 47 5i 5i 50 50 56 51 48 55 50 509 25 

30 41 48 50 47 51 55 48 54 50 42 486 21 



THE EXPERIMENTS 119 

(b) Method of Scoring Descriptions. The de- 
scriptions were graded by the method of counting 
points which is ordinarily used in scoring Aussage 
tests. In this instance each point was weighted 
by the judge according to its clearness of mean- 
ing on a basis of "10" for "perfectly definite." A 
score of 12-98 indicates that the pupil has given 
12 points of description with sufficient clearness of 
statement to total 98. The descriptions were 
then ranked according to total scores. Where 
ties occurred the method of intermediate ranking 
was used; thus, a tie at 22 and 23 was ranked 22.5. 

Each judge read all of the descriptions of a 
group before beginning to score. Each paper was 
then given a second preliminary reading, after 
which it was read a third time and scored by 
points. The final marks were determined by 
averaging the rankings of the ten judges. 

(c) Method of Scoring Diagrams. The 51 dia- 
grams of the structure of a feather were scored on 
the basis of a system of weighted points. One of 
the judges first ranked the diagrams serially ac- 
cording to the merit of their general appearance. 
To test the reliability of this ranking, a list of all 
the points which could be shown in a complete 
diagram of the feather was prepared. A second 
judge then ranked the diagrams according to the 
total number of points exhibited. The ranking 
which had been made upon the basis of general 



120 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

appearance was now compared with the ranking 
which had been made upon the basis of the number 
of structural points shown. The two rankings 
were approximately, but not exactly, similar. 
The discrepancies were taken into account and a 
new system of weighted points arranged which 
made allowance for the difficulty as well as the 
number of the points shown in the diagram. The 
list follows: 

Standard for Measuring Quality of Diagrams 

Characteristics Shown Credit 

1. Barbs attached to one side of shaft I point 

2. Barbs attached to both sides of shaft y£ " 

3. Barbs shown parallel yi " 

4. Barbs shown at a slant to shaft yi " 

5. Barbs attached to all parts of shaft I 

6. Barbules attached to one side of barb 1 

7. Barbules attached to both sides of barb yi " 

8. Barbules shown parallel yi " 

9. Barbules at proper slant yi. " 

10. Two distinct kinds of barbules I 

1 1. Barbules intermingled 1 " 

12. Barbules attached to all parts of barb 1 

13. Hooks attached to barbule I 

14. Several hooks on one barbule )4 " 

15. Hooks on upper row only I 

16. Hooks hooking over barbules at a slant I 

17. Hooks on entire margin of row of barbules. . 1 



Total possible score 13^ points 

Points labeled insufficiently are given one-half credit. 
Points labeled incorrectly are graded o. 



THE EXPERIMENTS 121 

Attention is called to the fact that the standard 
is not used to measure ability in representative 
drawing. In fact, the diagrams for the most 
part look very little like the original feather. It 
is, in reality, a measure of analytical observation, 
for the diagram called for is an excellent example 
of what is described in the first chapter as "analyt- 
ical drawing." The pupil must have made the 
preliminary scientific analysis called for in the test 
directions before he can construct a successful 
diagram. As the particular test used requires a 
wide range of discrimination and considerable 
ingenuity in figuring out the structural plan of 
the feather, it serves most excellently for compar- 
ing the pupil's ability in analytical drawing with 
his ability in representative drawing. 

4. Method of Determining Correlation. The pres- 
ence of correlation signifies that some definite 
causal relation exists between two series or groups 
of data. The mere fact that two coexisting con- 
ditions vary in the same direction does not imply 
true correlation unless one condition is the cause 
of the other or both are due to a third cause. But 
if it can be shown that there are common factors 
possible to two variables, a tendency, however 
small, for the variables to fluctuate constantly in 
the same or opposite directions may be taken as 
proof of an actual correlation. Thus the determ- 
ination of a small degree of correlation between 



122 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

any two traits or achievements of a group of 
school children at once assumes significance, 
because there is no question about the common 
factors of intelligence and training. The import- 
ant problem in this event is the elimination of 
all possibility of error in the method of finding 
the degree of correlation. 

(i) Correlation by the Rank Method. The most 
practicable method of determining correlation 
between abilities for which there is no standard 
scale of measurement is by the rank method. 
When the same group has been ranked in two 
abilities in the manner described above, the results 
offer data for direct comparison. Column A, 
Table V, shows how the 51 high school students 
(see Test No. 1) stood when ranked in order of 
ability in description. The pupil ranked 1 was 
best in description; No. 2 was second best; and 
so on down to No. 51, who was the poorest of the 
entire group. Column B shows the order of 
merit of the same group in drawing. 

By thus arranging the individual describers in 
a column in order, 1 to 51, and placing directly 
opposite the rank each received in drawing, we 
can get a general idea of the comparative ranking 
of the students in the two different abilities. Save 
in extreme cases, such casual comparison of the 
two columns will not be sufficient to ascertain 
satisfactorily the degree of correlation which may 



Table V 

Comparison of Abilities in Drawing and Description of 51 
High School Pupils 

ABC ABC 



Rank in Rank in D or Dif- 

Name Descrip- Drawing ference 

tion in Rank 



Rank in Rank in D or Dif- 
Name Descrip- Drawing ference 
tion in Rank 



Brock 
Angel 
Klein 
Rose 
Bean 
Moraw 
Henry 

Glass 8 
Mathew 9 

Greve 10 

Lawler 1 1 

Cooper 12 

Willet 13 

Hogan 14 

Bolte 15 

Wilson 16 

Keen 17 

Heck 18 

Foster 19 

Ansorg 20 
McKinn 21 

Leap 22 

Runs 23 

Donald 24 

Donker 25 

Joseph 26 



36 
38 
30 
19 
26 
42 
24 
11 
39 
37 
49 

3 
35 
4i 

5 
33 
12 

43 
27 

17 
32 

48 
40 
10 

34 
2 



35 
36 

27 

15 
21 
36 
17 

3 
30 
27 
38 

9 
22 
27 
10 
17 

5 
25 

8 

3 
11 

26 

17 

14 

9 

24 



(Continued from below) 



Pierce 27 

Stone 28 

Furth 29 

Logan 30 

Sully 31 

Hagen 32 

Vander 33 

Cook 34 

Virden 35 

Lee 36 

Ames 37 

Lovel 38 

Gamble 39 

Jack 40 

Tipton 41 

Cutler 42 

Adler 43 
Hill 
Jacob 
Atty 
Agar 

"Knapp 48 

Weber 49 

Ingle 50 

Cole 51 



44 
45 
46 

47 



15 
47 
21 
22 
20 
6 

44 
16 

25 
8 

51 

9 

46 

50 
18 
28 

1 
31 
45 

7 
23 
13 
29 

4 
14 



12 
19 



11 
26 
11 
18 
10 
28 
14 
29 
7 
10 

23 
14 
42 
13 
o 

39 
24 
35 
20 
46 
37 



(Continued above) 



51)1016 



Average Rank Difference or Av. D. equals 19.9 
Chance D. equals 17 
r= — .271 P.E.r = .09 R = — .172 



124 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

be present. A number of significant possibilities 
lie bound up in data of this nature and the true 
one may be discovered only by careful study. 

(a) First Possibility. The more ability a per- 
son has in drawing, the more he has in descrip- 
tion. Then in a given test, barring errors in grad- 
ing, the student ranking I in drawing ranks I in 
description; No. 2 in drawing is 2 in description; 
and so on through the series. Such a correspond- 
ence is signified by saying that the correlation 
equals 1 or 100% positive. Such a correlation 
exists between the volume and the weight of 
water. The merest glance at Table V shows that 
such a correlation does not exist between abilities 
in drawing and description. No. 1 in description 
is 36 in drawing. 

(b) Second Possibility. The more ability a 
person has in drawing, the less he has in descrip- 
tion. No. 1 in drawing would in this case be 51 
in description; No. 2 in drawing would be 50 in 
description; and the others similarly related. This 
type of correlation is said to be — 1 or — 100% 
negative. Such a correlation exists between the 
volume and the amount of pressure exerted by a 
given weight of gas. It plainly does not exist in 
Table V. 

(c) Third Possibility. The abilities in the two 
traits are in no way related, the obtained results 
occurring by mere chance. Such a result would 



THE EXPERIMENTS 125 

be obtained, for instance, if the papers were graded 
as they happened to lie in order in the pile without 
reference to their contents. Results indicating 
such a relationship are expressed by saying that 
the correlation is indifferent or equal to 0. The 
factor of chance correlation is particularly signifi- 
cant when dealing with small groups and in any 
case must always be discounted before a seeming 
correlation can be used as a basis for proof or infer- 
ence. It will be necessary to examine our results 
more closely to determine if an indifferent correla- 
tion is present. 

(d) Fourth Possibility. There is a tendency 
more or less pronounced for those good in draw- 
ing to be good in description, or, on the contrary, 
for those good in drawing to be poor in descrip- 
tion. Such a tendency, depending upon its 
strength, manifests itself by a certain proportion 
of one group being good, or bad, as the case may 
be, in the other. According to the strength of the 
tendency it approaches plus 1, or +100%, if 
positive, or minus 1, or — 100%, if negative. A 
complete analysis of the results obtained in this 
experiment will be necessary to detect partial 
correlation. 

(e) Fifth Possibility. A certain selected part of 
one group is correlated with a certain part of the 
other group, while the rest of the group is indiffer- 
ently correlated. Thus the best ten in drawing 



126 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

may be very good in description, with all of the 
others in the group scattering. This type of 
correlation cannot be expressed by a simple co- 
efficient, but must be shown by tabulations or 
graphs of the entire series. The results of this 
experiment give no evidence of this type of cor- 
relation. 

It is evident that such terms as good, poor, fair, 
etc., secured from a brief inspection of compara- 
tive data do not indicate the amount of correla- 
tion with sufficient accuracy for scientific pur- 
poses. We have, therefore, resorted to more 
accurate methods of determining correlation. 

(2) Theory of Correlation. The fundamental 
factor in correlation, as shown by the rank method, 
is the relative position of the same individual in 
two series of rankings. For instance, Glass (see 
Table V), who ranks II out of 51 in drawing 
ability and 8 in description, differs in relative 
position by only 3 points, which indicates a high 
positive correlation. Adler, however, who is first 
in drawing, ranks 43 in description, differing in 
position by 42 points, which indicates a negative 
correlation. 

The rank differences, 3 and 42, are designated 
D, and serve as an indication of the tendency of 
correlation. A single D in a series of 51 D's 
indicates but little, for it may be due entirely to 
chance, just as the man who is first in wealth 



THE EXPERIMENTS 127 

among 51 may by pure chance be either second or 
forty- third in weight. If, however, we obtain the 
average of the 51 rank differences, we shall have a 
figure which measures the degree of correlation 
present. This measure is the Average Rank Dif- 
ference, or, more simply, the Average D. In this 
series (see Table V, column C) the Average D is 
19.9. 

The Average D due to pure chance is equal to 
one-third of the number of subjects in a series, in 
this case one- third of 51, or 17. This average is 
called the Chance D. It means that if a pupil's 
D is less than 17, it is likely that there is some com- 
mon factor which favors positive correlation; if 
the pupil's D is more than 17, it is probable that 
there is a common factor interfering with positive 
correlation and producing a negative correlation. 
If now we contrast the Average D obtained for 
the 51 pupils, 19.9, with the Chance D, 17, we must 
conclude that within this group there is a tend- 
ency for ability in drawing to interfere with ability 
in description. The degree of correlation is indi- 
cated by the amount of difference between the 
Chance D and the Average D, in this case 17 — 19.9, 
or — 2.9. This sum is not large enough to be par- 
ticularly significant with as few as 51 subjects. As 
a matter of fact, it is reduced by the results of the 
other series. For a rapid and accurate method of 
ascertaining the presence of correlation in a series 
of pairings approximating 50, the author recom- 



128 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

mends the foregoing method. Reduced to formu- 
lae, we have the following: 

Average D = ^^; Chance D = |; in which S is 
the symbol for summation, D is the numerical 
difference between each corresponding pair of 
ranks, and n is the number of pairs. If the 
Average D is found to be within the range of 
•f ± 2, there is no evidence of significant correla- 
tion. 

To find the numerical value of the correlation, 
the following formula may be used: 

This quantity should be doubled if negative, 
which will obviate Lehman and Pederson's criti- 
cism given to Spearman's "Foot-Rule" method. 
This formula will give almost identically the same 
results as Spearman's: 

« 2 — I 

in which g equals the numerical gain in rank of 

those individuals who made a gain in the second 

series over the first. 

Correlation may also be computed by the 

"Pearson Method Adapted to Rank Differences," 

which gives more weight to the large D's. The 

formula, in which r is the degree of correlation, is: 

65(Z? J ) 

r = I ; 

n (n 2 — i) 



THE EXPERIMENTS 129 

Provision is made for variation due to chance by 
use of the formula : 

(1— n 2 ) 
P.E.^.7063 ^7=^- 
v n 

If r is no greater than P.E., there is no indication 
whatever of correlation. If r is greater than 3 
P.E., the chances are 16 to 1 that an actual cor- 
relation exists. 

The correlations obtained by both the Spear- 
man and Pearson methods are given in the follow- 
ing results. The variations between them are 
without particular significance for these experi- 
ments. 

5. Results and Conclusions. 

(a) Correlation between Drawing and Descrip- 
tion. The individual positions of the 51 high 
school pupils, and the group correlation between 
abilities in drawing and description are exhibited 
in Table V. Tables VI and VII show similar 
data for the group of 48 graduate students. Table 

VI shows the description in serial arrangement 
with the corresponding ranks in drawing. Table 

VII compares the descriptions to the drawings in 
serial order. Tables VIII and IX exhibit the cor- 
relations of the three remaining groups of students. 



Table VI 



Comparison of Abilities in Drawing and Description 
48 Adult Students 
ABC ABC 



Rank in Rank in D or Dif- 

Name Descrip- Drawing ference 

tion in Rank 



Rank in Rank in D or Dif- 
Name Descrip- Drawing ference 
tion in Rank 



Cragun 


1 


7 


6 


Russ 


2 


32 


30 


Hughes 


3 


18 


15 


Hosmer 


4 


6 


2 


White 


5 


20 


15 


Carr 


6 


16 


10 


Geilen 


7 


27 


20 


George 


8 


36 


28 


Ganard 


9 


22 


13 


Wagner 


10 


25 


15 


Hubb 


11 


9 


2 


M'Cann 


12 


35 


23 


Dohert 


13 


10 


3 


Brown 


14 


19 


5 


Heig 


15 


39 


24 


Boden 


16 


1 


15 


Duffy 


17 


40 


23 


Hope 


18 


3 


15 


Buch 


19 


42 


23 


Moss 


20 


38 


18 


Kerst 


21 


13 


8 


Rhodes 


22 


26 


4 


Burg 


23 


17 


6 


Snod 


24 


43 


19 



(Continued 
Cano 25 
M'C'mb 26 
Shield 27 
Butler 28 
Colpit 29 
Ferry 30 
Cato 31 
Weber 32 
Mitch 33 
Coward 34 
Harmon 35 
Smith 36 
Whitem 37 
Allen 38 
Jenn 39 
Kenn 40 
Yarbo 41 
Hutch 42 
Donson 43 
Zeller 44 
Thomas 45 
Vogel 46 
Cowan 47 
Porter 48 



jm 


Delow) 


41 


16 


8 


18 


15 


12 


44 


16 


12 


17 


46 


16 


29 


2 


11 


21 


2 


31 


23 


11 


5 


30 


14 


22 


28 


9 


33 


5 


24 


15 


48 


8 


45 


4 


3i 


11 


4 


39 


47 


3 


30 


15 


37 


9 


34 


13 


21 


27 



(Continued above) 



48)712 



r = .228 



Average Rank Difference = 14.9 
Chance Rank Difference =16. 

P.E.y = .09 R = .079 



Table Vll 

Comparison of Abilities in Drawing and Description 

48 Adult Students 





A 


B 


C 




A 


B 


c 


Rank in 


Rank in 


D or Dif- 


Rank in 


Rank in 


D or Dif- 


Name Drawing 


Descrip- 


ference 


Name Descrip- 


Drawing 


ference 






tion 


in Rank 




tion 




in Rank 










(Continued from below) 


Boden 


I 


16 


15 


Wagner 


25 


10 


15 


Mitch 


2 


33 


31 


Rhodes 


26 


22 


4 


Hope 


3 


18 


15 


Geilen 


27 


7 


20 


Donson 


4 


43 


39 


Whitem 


28 


37 


9 


Harmon 


5 


35 


30 


Cato 


29 


3i 


2 


Hosmer 


6 


4 


2 


Thomas 


30 


45 


15 


Cragun 


7 


1 


6 


Hutch 


31 


42 


11 


M'C'mb 


8 


26 


18 


Russ 


32 


2 


30 


Hubb 


9 


11 


2 


Allen 


33 


38 


5 


Dohert 


10 


13 


3 


Cowan 


34 


47 


13 


Weber 


11 


32 


21 


M'Cann 


35 


12 


23 


Colpit 


12 


29 


17 


George 


36 


8 


28 


Kerst 


13 


21 


8 


Fogel 


37 


46 


9 


Smith 


H 


36 


22 


Moss 


38 


20 


18 


Shield 


15 


27 


12 


Heig 


39 


15 


24 


Carr 


16 


6 


10 


Duffy 


40 


17 


23 


Burg 


17 


23 


6 


Cano 


41 


25 


16 


Hughes 


18 


3 


15 


Buch 


42 


19 


23 


Brown 


19 


14 


5 


Snod 


43 


24 


19 


White 


20 


5 


15 


Butler 


44 


28 


16 


Porter 


21 


48 


27 


Yarbo 


45 


41 


4 


Ganard 


22 


9 


13 


Ferry 


46 


30 


16 


Cowart 


23 


34 


11 


Zeller 


47 


44 


3 


Jenn 


24 


39 


15 


Kenn 


48 


40 


8 



(Continued above) 



48)712 



.200 



Average Rank Difference = 14.9 
Average Chance Difference =16. 
P.E. r = .09 R = .079 



Table VIII 

Comparison of Abilities in Drawing and Description 
50 College Students 





A 


B 


c 




A 


B 


c 


Rank in 


Rank in 


D or Dif- 


Rank in 


Rank in 


D or Dif- 


Name Descrip- 


Drawing 


ference 


Name Descrip- 


Drawing 


ference 




tion 




in Rank 


tion 




in Rank 










(Continued from below) 


Halm 


I 


43 


42 


Hone 


26 


32 


6 


Clark 


2 


45 


43 


Mclll 


27 


27 





Bloys 


3 


36 


33 


Park 


28 


48 


20 


John 


4 


20 


16 


Huston 


29 


8 


21 


Lewis 


5 


12 


7 


Moss 


30 


31 


I 


Miller 


6 


47 


4i 


Tuny 


3i 


14 


17 


Cume 


7 


35 


28 


Webon 


32 


33 


I 


Duncam 8 


39 


3i 


Scott 


33 


22 


II 


Mull 


9 


19 


10 


Rankin 


34 


28 


6 


Webb 


10 


49 


39 


Quinn 


35 


13 


22 


Alex 


11 


34 


23 


Bland 


36 


5 


31 


Crook 


12 


1 


11 


Erhart 


37 


23 


14 


Ever 


13 


3 


10 


Fite 


38 


37 


1 


Weir 


14 


6 


8 


Hug 


39 


4 


35 


Powe 


15 


16 


1 


Mill 


40 


50 


10 


Angus 


16 


11 


5 


Walters 


4i 


42 


1 


Cole 


17 


40 


23 


James 


42 


30 


12 


Mann 


18 


2 


16 


Coon 


43 


44 


1 


Oxly 


19 


10 


9 


River 


44 


23 


21 


Evert 


20 


46 


26 


Kalt 


45 


41 


4 


Fogal 


21 


17 


4 


Habt 


46 


18 


28 


Wills 


22 


24 


2 


Ellin 


47 


7 


40 


Woods 


23 


9 


14 


Peter 


48 


26 


22 


Austin 


24 


36 


12 


Doby 


49 


25 


24 


Cordy 


25 


15 


10 


Betts 


50 


29 


21 



(Continued above) 



50)834 



r — — .041 



P.E. r = .1 



Av. D. = 16.68 
Chance D. = 16.66 
R = — .001 



Table i£ 

Comparison of Abilities in Drawing and Description 

Group A, 30 College Students; 

Group B, 31 College Students. 





Group A 






Group B 




Rank in 


Rank in 


D 


Rank in 


Rank in 


D 


Drawing 


Descrip- 
tion 




Drawing 


Descrip- 
tion 





I 


5 


4 


1 


25 


24 


2 


13 


11 


2 


20 


18 


3 


7 


4 


3 


15 


12 


4 


26 


22 


4 


4 





5 


16 


11 


5 


7 


2 


6 


29 


23 


6 


26 


20 


7 


17 


10 


7 


1 


6 


8 


3 


5 


8 


3i 


23 


9 


2 


7 


9 


3 


6 


10 


6 


4 


10 


28 


18 


11 


12 


1 


11 


13 


2 


12 


14 


2 


12 


9 


3 


13 


28 


15 


13 


5 


8 


14 


23 


7 


14 


16 


2 


15 


20 


5 


15 


14 


1 


16 


24 


8 


16 


29 


13 


17 


21 


4 


17 


2 


15 


18 


27 


9 


18 


11 


7 


19 


9 


10 


19 


27 


8 


20 


25 


5 


20 


8 


12 


21 


19 


2 


21 


10 


11 


22 


1 


21 


22 


21 


1 


23 


15 


8 


23 


6 


17 


24 


18 


6 


24 


30 


6 


25 


4 


21 


25 


17 


8 


26 


22 


4 


26 


23 


3 


27 


9 


18 


27 


12 


15 


28 


8 


20 


28 


24 


4 


29 


10 


19 


29 


22 


7 


30 


30 





30 


19 


11 









31 


18 


13 



30)286 
il». p. = 9.53 

Chance D. = 10.00 
.074 R = .047 

P.E. r = .12 



31)296 

Av. D. = 9.55 

Chance D. = 10.33 

r = .151 i? = .076 

P.E. r = .12 



134 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

The names of the subjects are omitted in Table 
IX. The figures indicate the rank of the indi- 
viduals in the series stated at the head of the 
column. 

The amount of correlation discovered between 
drawing and description in the five groups of sub- 
jects who were tested in Experiment I is shown in 
Summary form in Table X. The Av. D., the 
Chance D., the degree of correlation by the Pear- 
son method (r), its Probable Error (P. E. r ), and 
the degree of correlation by the Spearman method 
(R), is given for each group, together with the 
averages of the five groups. 

Table X 

Correlation between Drawing and Description 





Number 


Average 


Chance 


r 


P.E.r 


R 




Subjects 


RankZ? 


RankD 








(I) 


5i 


19.90 


17.00 


— .271 


.09 


— . 172 


(2) 


48 


14.90 


16.00 


.200 


.09 


.079 


(3) 


50 


16.68 


16.66 


— .041 


.10 


— .001 


(4) 


30 


9-53 


10.00 


.074 


. 12 


.047 


(5) 


3i 
210 


9-55 


10.33 


•151 


. 12 
.O48 


.076 


All 


70.56 


70.00 


.023 


.006 



Conclusion. The combined results of the tests 
taken by the 210 subjects show that there is no 
correlation between ability in representative draw- 



THE EXPERIMENTS 13S 

ing and ability in description. This is evidenced 
by the average of the coefficients of correlation 
determined by the Pearson method (.023), that 
determined by the Spearman method (.006), and 
by the equivalence of the Chance D's and the 
Average D's. A pupil who is good in description 
is not necessarily good in drawing. He may be 
either good, medium, or poor, as chance wills it. 
Because a pupil can not draw well is not a sign 
that he cannot describe an object well. There is 
nothing in common between the two processes 
which justifies using them for the same purpose 
in laboratory teaching. 

(b) Correlation between Diagramming-Drawing 
and Diagramming-Description. The correlation 
between abilities in diagramming and drawing and 
between diagramming and description was esti- 
mated for the group of 51 high school students in 
exactly the same manner as has been described 
for the drawing-description correlation. The fol- 
lowing degrees of correlation were established : 

Diagramming-Drawing r = — .052 

Diagramming-Description r - .231 

Ability in diagramming (which is a type of 
analytical drawing) is not, therefore, correlated 
with ability in representative drawing. On the 
other hand, the processes of diagramming and 
description exhibit a positive correlation (.231) 



136 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

which, although small, is significant of the pres- 
ence of a common factor between the two. It is 
evident from the results of Experiment I that the 
process of representative drawing is similar neither 
to description nor to diagramming. The pro- 
cesses of diagramming and description, on the 
contrary, show an intimacy of relationship which 
is indicative of an inherent similarity between the 
two. This contrast will receive further emphasis 
by the results of the experiments to follow. 

Experiment II. Drawing and School Grades. 

i. Problem. To evaluate the correlation be- 
tween achievement in "school" Drawing and 
achievement in other school subjects. 

2. Materials. The materials included the final 
grades received by 141 normal school students for 
one year's work in various school subjects includ- 
ing Drawing. All students were required to take 
Drawing two times per week throughout the year. 
The total number of grades, exclusive of Drawing, 
includes 810 individual marks in 28 school subjects 
taught by 15 different teachers. 

3. Method of Procedure. It was necessary to 
adjust the method of correlation to the system of 
grading in use at the normal school from which 
the statistics were secured. The different grades 
assigned under this sytem are 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, and o. 
The grades run by theoretically equal steps from 



THE EXPERIMENTS 137 

5 for the best grade of work down to o for the 
poorest. It was necessary to shift the marks of 
four of the fifteen teachers one point in order to 
make the correlations upon the basis of actually 
parallel rankings. 

Table XI exhibits the method of tabulation 
and correlation which was followed for all school 
subjects. The 21 members of the class in Latin 
are ranked as they stood in the six grades which 
are possible in Drawing. The rank in Latin is 
placed directly opposite the rank in Drawing. 
The difference between the two gives the Rank 
Difference (d). Following this in the last vertical 
column is the product of the Rank Difference 
squared (d 2 ), which is required in the computa- 
tion of the correlation by the (adapted) Pearson 
formula, 

6S(d) 



r = 1 



N(n 2 — 1) 



It is necessary to remember that the number of 
cases differs from the number of ranks. The 
number of cases (N) varies with the class (in this 
case, 21); the number of ranks (n) is always 6. 

4. Results. A summary of the results obtained 
from the entire 810 pairings is exhibited in Table 
XII. The several classes are grouped under the 
titles of Manual Training, Mathematics, Foreign 
Languages, Household Arts, English, Music, Edu- 



138 



THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 



Table XI 

Correlation between Achievement in Drawing and Achieve- 
ment in Latin as Shown by School Grades 





Rank In 






Name 


Drawing 


Latin 


J 


0)a 


Haulot 


I 


3 


2 


4 


Mullen 


2 


2 


O 


o 


Thiel 


3 


I 


2 


4 


Wier 


3 


2 


I 


i 


Tomkins 


3 


2 


I 


i 


McComb 


3 


2 


I 


i 


Austin 


3 


3 


O 





Behn 


3 


6 


3 


9 


Corbin 


4 


I 


3 


9 


Lassator 


4 


i 


3 


9 


Fogal 


4 


2 


2 


4 


Pitts 


4 


2 


2 


4 


White 


4 


3 


I 


I 


Powell 


4 


4 





o 


Hodnett 


4 


4 








Osley 


4 


4 


o 





Kittle 


4 


6 


2 


4 


Weather 


5 


6 


I 


i 


Blount 


5 


6 


I 


i 


Bloys 


6 


6 





o 


Johnson 


6 


6 


o 


o 


N= 21 




5(d) 


= 25 


53 = S(d*) 


*■ . — T 


6 S (<P) 


—r? T 


6x53 


, cAfi 



JV (n«— i) 



21x35 



THE EXPERIMENTS 



139 



Table XII 

Correlation Between Achievement in Drawing and Other 
School Subjects as Shown by School Grades 









Rank Difference 












Number 


















Subject 


Students 





1 


2 


3 


4 


S(d) 


R 


r 


Man. Tr. 


18 


4 


4 


5 


4 


I 


30 


.16 


.28 


Mathematics 


98 


19 


45 


18 


13 


3 


132 


•33 


•49 


Fgn. Lang. 


39 


11 


15 


7 


6 





49 


•37 


•57 


Home Econ. 


no 


21 


58 


26 


4 


1 


126 


•43 


.66 


English 


144 


36 


67 


3i 


10 





159 


•47 


.68 


Music 


134 


38 


58 


32 


4 


2 


142 


•47 


.68 


Education 


116 


31 


55 


22 


8 





123 


•57 


•73 


History 


35 


15 


10 


7 


2 





30 


.60 


.80 


Science 


116 


4i 


60 


12 


3 





93 


.60 


.80 



All 



810 216 372 160 54 7 



•45 -66 



cation, History, and Science. The degrees of 
correlations between the various school subjects 
and Drawing are shown in the last two columns 
by the Spearman and Pearson methods, respect- 
ively. 

5. Special Observations. Any legitimate inter- 
pretation of the foregoing array of statistics must 
take into account the complexity of factors which 
enter into the assignment of school grades. Spec- 
ial inquiry shows that the grades in Drawing were 



140 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

computed from a number of separate factors. 
These include (a) ability in representative draw- 
ing, (b) ability in designing, (c) ability in artistic 
discrimination, (d) ability with color, washes, 
shading, etc., (e) attendance, (f) discipline, and 
(g) vocational interest. 

Without taking into account the possibility of 
similar heterogeneity in the grading of other 
classes, it is evident that the gross correlations 
found for achievement in school Drawing do not 
necessarily apply to its individual factors. As a 
check upon the factor of ability in representative 
drawing, the drawings of the 51 high school 
students, which were secured in Part I of Test No. 
1, were compared directly to the class standings 
of the same students. Two correlations were 
computed by the methods previously described; 
one with grades in Science, and one with the aver- 
age of the class standings in Science, English, 
Latin, and Mathematics. In neither case was 
correlation between representative drawing and achieve- 
ment in school subjects shown. 

6. Conclusion. Achievement in Drawing is 
highly correlated with achievement in other 
school subjects, averaging nearly 70 per cent, 
positive. This is, no doubt, due to the fact that 
the standard of drawing instruction calls for a 
variety of mental and motor processes which are 
the same as, or similar to, those found in other 



THE EXPERIMENTS 141 

school subjects. Ability in representative draw- 
ing is not correlated with achievement in school 
subjects when it is isolated from the other factors 
of school Drawing. 1 

Experiment III. Retention and the Devices 
Used to Secure It. 

1. Problem. To determine the correlation be- 
tween retention and representative drawing, de- 
scription, and analytical drawing. 

Two special tests were used for the solution of 
this problem. Each consisted of an unannounced 
examination given to test the student's memory 
of the characteristics of an object which had 
been drawn, described, or diagrammed previously. 

2. Method of Procedure. Test No. 1. Sub- 
jects. 51 students in a first-year high school class 
in General Science. (See Experiment I.) 

Twenty-four hours after the analytical study of 
the feather previously described, the pupils were 
given the following examination: 

1. Make a simple diagram of a feather, 
showing and labeling the parts visible to the 
naked eye. 

2. (a) What difference is there in the two 
sides of a feather? (b) What difference is there 
between the upper and lower surfaces? 



1 See also Albien's experiment, p. 36. 



142 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

3. Explain in detail how the various parts of 
a feather are held together. 

4. Distinguish two kinds of barbules as to 
their shape and position. 

3. Method of Scoring. The examination papers 
were carefully scored on a basis of points similar 
to that described for the scoring of descriptions 
and diagrammatic drawings. (See Experiment 
I.) The pupils were then ranked according to 
the degree of merit of their answers to the ques- 
tions of the test. As the questions involve the 
recall of the essential characteristics of the feather, 
the results exhibit the comparative amount of 
retention possessed by each student. By com- 
paring the position of an individual pupil in reten- 
tion with his position in representative drawing, 
description, ' or analytical drawing, it is possible 
to determine the degree of correlation present 
between retention and each of the devices used to 
secure it. 

4. Results of Test No. 1. Table XIII shows in 
detail the correlation which exists between these 
several devices and retention. Considered as a 
measure of the group as a whole, the individual 
tabulations in Table XIII may be reduced to the 
following general correlations: 

Representative Drawing and Retention . . r ■=■ — .022 

Description and Retention r ■= .234 

Analytical Drawing and Retention r = .433 



THE EXPERIMENTS 



143 



Table XIII 

Correlation between Retention and Representative Drawing, 

Description, and Analytical Drawing 



Rank 


Rank 


Rank 


Rank 


Rank 


Rank 


Rank 


Rank 


in 


in 


in 


in 


in 


in 


in 


in 


Memo- 


Draw- 


Des- 


Dia- 


Memo- 


Draw- 


Des- 


Dia- 


ry 


ing 


crip- 
tion 


gram 


ry 


ing 


crip- 
tion 


gram 


I 


38 


2 


I 


(Continued from below) 


2 


41 


14 


5 


26 


24 


7 


2 


3 


37 


I 


14 


27 


6 


32 


47 


4 


22 


30 


4i 


28 


16 


34 


18 


5 


7 


46 


4 


29 


20 


31 


8 


6 


17 


20 


10 


30 


4 


50 


22 


7 


48 


22 


43 


31 


44 


18 


40 


8 


27 


19 


6 


32 


19 


4 


17 


9 


42 


6 


27 


33 


13 


48 


45 


10 


39 


9 


31 


34 


33 


16 


33 


11 


31 


44 


19 


35 


11 


8 


44 


12 


36 


10 


9 


36 


23 


47 


36 


13 


18 


41 


26 


37 


1 


43 


38 


14 


21 


29 


12 


38 


43 


33 


29 


15 


9 


38 


23 


39 


8 


36 


11 


16 


35 


13 


35 


40 


29 


42 


21 


17 


5i 


37 


24 


41 


30 


3 


46 


18 


25 


35 


39 


42 


2 


26 


42 


19 


10 


24 


34 


43 


47 


28 


28 


20 


26 


5 


25 


44 


32 


21 


7 


21 


12 


17 


30 


45 


15 


27 


20 


22 


28 


49 


51 


46 


46 


39 


47 


23 


34 


25 


13 


47 


49 


11 


16 


24 


3 


12 


15 


48 


50 


40 


50 


25 


45 


45 


3 


49 


5 


45 


30 




(Continued above) 


50 


40 


23 


48 










51 


14 


51 


49 



144 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

5. Conclusion. There is no correlation between 
skill in representative drawing and subsequent 
retention of the essential characteristics of the 
object drawn. There is noticeable correlation 
(.243) between ability in description and reten- 
tion. There is marked correlation (433) between 
ability in analytical drawing and subsequent re- 
tention. These facts are of the utmost importance 
to laboratory teaching and will receive further 
comment in the concluding chapter. 

6. Method of Procedure. Test No. 2. Subjects. 
61 college students. 

It is frequently held that, whatever else may be 
lacking, the process of drawing compels the obser- 
vation of form and color. In view of this claim, 
a special test was devised to compare the amounts 
of retention of this type secured by the devices 
of drawing and description. 

The subjects of the test were divided into two 
groups, A and B, of 30 and 31 members, respect- 
ively. Each member of Group A was given a 
triangular metallic object (see Figure 3), desig- 
nated as the "triangle." Each member of Group 
B was given a small metallic sash-lift (see Figure 
4). They were given similar drawing materials 
and instructed as follows: 

Part I. 

Write your name at the top of the page of 
^rawing paper. Place the object in position as 



THE EXPERIMENTS 145 

directed and draw it so that it may be identi- 
fied by your drawing. (Time allowed, 8 min- 
utes.) 

The members of Group A exchanged objects 
with Group B, and all were directed: 

Part II. 

Write your name at the top of he page. 
Place the object in position as directed and 
describe it so that it may be identified by your 
description. (Time allowed, 8 minutes.) 

The danger of mental superiority on the part 
of one group over the other was obviated by the 
exchange of objects between the two parts of the 
experiment, which permitted all of the subjects 
both to draw and to describe. 

Five days later the same subjects (one absent) 
were given an unannounced examination to test 
their retention of the elements of form and color 
which had characterized the two objects. 

Part III. 

Directions after passing paper: "I am about 
to ask you a series of questions concerning the 
objects which you drew and described five days 
ago. I am extremely anxious that no one shall 
in any way be aided by any other student, so 
I shall insist that you keep your eyes away 
from the work of other students, and that you 
neither make comments nor ask questions 
which may be in the least suggestive to other 
members of the class." 



146 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

The questions below were then read and 
answered one at a time, each student writing his 
answer. When necessary, the exact meanings of 
the directions were illustrated by diagrams on the 
blackboard. 

Set I. Sash-lift. 

Write your name at the top of the page. 
State whether you drew or described the sash- 
lift. 

1. Draw a line indicating the greatest width 
of the flat part of the sash-lift. 

2. Draw a line indicating the least width of 
the sash-lift. 

3. What is the ratio of the thickness of the 
material at the edge of the object, to that of 
the edge of a half-dollar; approximately, (a) 
two times as thick, (b) one and a half times as 
thick, (c) as thick, (d) two-thirds as thick, (e) 
one-half as thick, or (f) one-fourth as thick. 
(Each student was given a half-dollar for com- 
parison at this point.) 

4. Were the holes in the flat part, (a) nearer 
to the edges of the sides, (b) the base, or (c) 
were they the same distance from each? 

5. (a) Draw a circle indicating the size of 
the upper opening of one of the holes; (b) also 
a circle indicating the size of the lower opening. 
(The outside of the pencil mark is to be taken 
in these questions.) (c) Draw a line indicating 
the distance on the upper surface of the sash- 
lift between the two holes (measuring from 
inner edges). 



THE EXPERIMENTS 147 

6. Was the upper surface (a) polished approxi- 
mately smooth, or (b) were there numerous 
slight indentations or abrasions upon it? 

7. Was the exact contour of the upper part 
of the finger piece from the front (a) regularly 
rounding, or (b) somewhat flattened? 

8. State the color of the following areas of 
the sash-lift. (A diagram was drawn on the 
board and lettered, which divided the front 
and back surfaces of the sash-lift in six parts 
each. Two of these parts in the original were 
copper-colored, the remainder nearly black.) 

Set II. Triangle. 

Write your name at the top of the page. 
State whether you drew or described the tri- 
angular object. 

1. Draw a line indicating the exact length of 
one side of the object from tip to tip. 

2. Draw a line indicating the exact length of 
one of the outer sides of one of the inner tri- 
angles. 

3. What is the ratio of the thickness of the 
material at the edge of the object, to that of 
the edge of a ten-cent piece; approximately, 
(a) two times as thick, (b) one and a half times 
as thick, (c) as thick, (d) two-thirds as thick, 
(e) one-half as thick, (f) one-fourth as thick. 
(Each student was given a ten-cent piece for 
comparison.) 

4. Were the three sides of the inner triangles 
(a) equal in length; (b) equally curving; (c) 
parallel, or askew, with the near sides of the 
outer triangle? 



148 THE PS YCHOL OG Y OF DRA WING 

5. (a) Draw a circle, the outer edge of which 
indicates the exact size of the hole in the center 
of the triangle, (b) Draw a line indicating the 
exact distance from the edge of the hole in the 
center to the nearest point of one of the sides 
of the triangle. 

6. Was the surface of the object (a) polished 
approximately smooth, or (b) were there slight 
indentations or abrasions upon it? 

7. Were the outer points of the triangle (a) 
regularly rounded, or (b) somewhat flattened? 

8. (a) Were the lines which delineated the 
various triangular figures on the concave side of 
the object grooves or ridges? (b) On the con- 
vex side? 

7. Results of Test No. 2. The results obtained 
from the foregoing test were concrete in character 
and readily submitted to objective measurement, 
which was carried out with accuracy and detail. 
The average error or percentage correct of each 
detail of the test was computed for both drawers 
and describers. The tabulated results are exhib- 
ited in Tables XIV, XV, and XVI. 

Drawing proves to be no better than descrip- 
tion as a device for securing retention of surface 
dimensions. It was 6% less efficient than descrip- 
tion with fine dimensions, and markedly inferior 
with the dimension of thickness. In the total 
recall of all dimensions, based upon 330 judg- 
ments, description surpassed drawing by over 
6%. 



THE EXPERIMENTS 149 

Table XIV 
Memory for Surface Dimensions 

Gross Dimensions Average Error Made by 

Drawers Describers 

Length of sash-lift 14. 7% 17.0% 

Width of sash-lift 18.7% 15-7% 

Length side triangle 11.6% 9-5% 

Side inner triangle 26.7% 27.7% 

Average total *7-9% 17-7% 

Fine Dimensions 

Between holes 71 . 0% 47. 0% 

Triangle hole 38.0% 34-1% 

Center to edge 46. 0% 60. 0% 

Upper hole 23.0% 19-7% 

Under hole 32.4% 22.0% 

Average total 1 . 42. 1 % 36. 6% 

Thickness 

Triangle 41-9% 41-4% 

Sash-lift 97-0% 56. 0% 

Final average error. ... 38. 3% 31.8% 

Neither drawing nor description exhibited 
marked superiority in the retention of the ele- 
ments of general design. 

The process of description is markedly superior 
to that of drawing as a device for securing reten- 
tion of color. The ratio of correct judgment is 
nearly 2 to 1 in favor of the pupils who made 
descriptions of the objects. 



150 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

Table XV 

Memory for General Design 

Drawers Describers 

Rights Rights 

Contour of: 

Sash-lift 22% 35% 

Triangle 73% 70% 

Position of: 

Sash-lift holes 20% 50% 

Triangle holes 73% 65% 

Surface Markings: 

Grooves, etc 93% 93% 

Abrasions, Triangle 93% 93% 

Abrasions, Sash-lift 90% 89% 

Final average rights 67% 7 J % 

Table XVI 
Memory for Color 

Drawers Describers 

Rights Rights 

Number seen 77-0% 100.0% 

Position 3.0% 55-0% 

Areas 38.8% 71-3% 

Average rights 39-6% 75-4% 

8. Conclusion. The results of Experiment III 
give positive evidence that representative draw- 
ing is not a successful device for securing the 
analytical observation necessary to successful 
retention. Even in its own domain of form and 
dimension it is no better than, and in all probabil- 
ity not equal to, the process of description. 



THE EXPERIMENTS 151 

Experiment IV. Analysis of Observation 
During Representative Drawing and 
Description. 

1. Problem. To determine the direction of 
attention during drawing and description. 

2. Method of Procedure. Subjects. 48 univers- 
ity graduate students. (See Test No. 2, p. 91). 
Immediately after spending seven minutes each in 
describing and drawing a microscope clip, the 
subjects of this experiment were given the follow- 
ing directions: 

Directions. Introspect carefully, and pro- 
ceed as follows: 

State in writing as definitely as possible any 
differences which distinguished your consider- 
ation of the object (a) while drawing it from 
that (b) while describing it, such as: 

1. Aspects or characteristics of the object 
which held your attention during (a) and (b) 
above. 

2. Kind of mental analysis of the object or 
mental procedure during (a) and (b). 

3. Difficulties in the technique of expression 
during (a) and (b). 

4. Any other specific difference which you 
may have experienced. 

The majority of these subjects had had con- 
siderable training in psychology and were able to 
make a satisfactory psychological analysis of their 
previous attempts at observation. The follow- 
ing summary presents the results obtained from 



152 



THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 



the foregoing introspections. It has been veri- 
fied frequently since the original experiment. 

3. Results. 

Analysis of Description and Drawing 
Scope of Attention 



Description 



of 



I . Many categories 
characteristics, such as: 

(a) spatial, 

(b) visual, 

(c) nomenclature, 

(d) classification, 

(e) material, 

(f) use, 

(g) construction, 
(h) kinaesthetic, 
(i) aesthetic, etc. 

3. Absolute circles, angles, 
dimensions, etc. 

3. All parts significant. 

4. Object dynamic. 



Drawing 

1. Characteristics limited 
to three categories: 

(a) spatial; — proportions, 

(b) visual; — appearance, 

(c) aesthetic; — beauty. 



2. Circles, etc., modified 
by distance and perspective. 

3. Surface view significant. 

4. Object static. 



THE EXPERIMENTS 



153 



Type of Mental Analysis 



Description 

1. Dealing with concepts. 

2. Rational analysis and 
synthesis. 

3. Constant comparison 
with previous knowledge; 
"association." 

4. A sequence of ideas and 
definitions logically devel- 
oped into a whole. 

5. Many categories of 
thought. Desire to dissect. 



6. Mental activity more 
intense. 

7. Various types of imag- 
ery used. 



Drawing 

1. Dealing with percepts. 

2. Imitative reproduc- 
tion. 

3. Constant comparison 
with appearance of resulting 
drawing; "isolation." 

4. Any part may be drawn 
into the whole at any time. 

5. Two groups present in 
class: 

(a) limited categories — 

geometrical, 
(b) trial by error methods. 

6. Mental activity relieved 
by motor. 

7. Visual imagery used. 



Difficulties 



Description 

1. Lack of proper words 
to express meanings realized. 

2. Not knowing how to 
be definite. 

3. Failure to think of at- 
tributes. 

4. Incompleteness. 

5. Difficulties with organi- 
zation of elements into a 
logical whole. 



Drawing 

1. Lack of control of hand 
in attempting lines. 

2. Not knowing how to 
produce three-dimension ef- 
fects. 

3. Failure to select ele- 
ments of form. 

4. Incorrectness. 

5. Difficulties of organiz- 
ing details into a unified 
whole. 



154 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

Experiment V. The Effect of Analytical 
Observation upon Drawing. 

i. Problem. To determine the effect of analyt- 
ical observation upon ability in representative 
drawing. 

2. Method of Procedure. Subjects. 16 gradu- 
ate students. A stuffed bird, the black-crowned 
night heron, was placed before a group of students 
for study. The students had never seen this 
species of bird before and none of them was 
acquainted with the methods of bird study. 
They were first acquainted with enough anatom- 
ical terms to enable them to follow the directions. 
The class was then divided equally into two groups. 
A and B. The members of both groups were 
given the following directions: 

Directions. Answer the following questions 
on the paper supplied: 

1. What is the shape of the bird's bill? 

2. What is the condition of the crown? The 
forehead? 

3. What is the position of the wings at rest 
with reference to the body and tail? 

4. The knee is concealed by the plumage. 
The first visible joint is the heel. The bone 
connecting the heel and the foot is the meta- 
tarsus. Which way does the heel bend? 

Each group was then given a special direction 
for observation which was not given to the other 
group. The directions follow: 



THE EXPERIMENTS 155 

Group A. Note carefully the comparative 
lengths of the bill and meta-tarsus. 

Group B. Note carefully the number and 
comparative lengths of the front and hind toes. 

Finally, both groups were given the following 
direction : 

Direction. Make a drawing of the night 
heron. Draw the bird in any convenient posi- 
tion. 

3. Results. The parts to which attention had 
previously been called were more accurately 
drawn than the parts which had not received 
mention. Group A, which had been directed to 
observe the comparative lengths of the bill and 
metatarsus, drew this feature with much greater 
accuracy than Group B, which had not received 
this instruction. Table XVII gives the compar- 
ative measurements of the drawings of the two 
groups for this feature. Other features exhibited 
similar results. 



156 



THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 



Table XVII 

Comparative Length of a Bird's Bill and Meta-tarsus Drawn 
with and without Previous Analytical Study. The Bill and 
Meta-tarsus are Actually of Equal Length. 



Group A (After analysis) 



Student 



Length Meta- 
of bill tarsus 



Group B (Without analysis) 



Student 



Length 
of bill 



Meta- 
tarsus 



A.K 25 mm. 24 mm. 



L.M.. 
F.P... 
F.S... 
R.C.. 
E.W.. 
W.M. 
J.S... 



25 
20 

9 
•25 
■30 
24 
•19 



28 
20 

9 
20 

32 
25 
17 



A.P 14 mm. 

L.W.. 
C.R.. 
H.M. 
J.P... 
O.P.. 
E.B.. 
S.J... 



■35 
•35 
.18 

• 4 
■25 
.28 

15 



40 
58 
45 

8 

35 
35 
25 



4. Conclusion. Analytical observation improves 
the ability to make a representative drawing. 
Greater accuracy of dimension is exhibited after 
such study. Group A, above, after having their 
attention directed to the comparative length of 
the bird's bill and meta-tarsus, drew it with ap- 
proximate accuracy. Group B, without such 
directed attention, made errors anywhere from 15 
to 250 per cent. 



Chapter VII 
FINAL CONCLUSIONS 

J. The Psychological Analysis of Drawing. 

The psychological analysis of drawing shows 
that the process of graphical expression is subject 
to the influence of three interrelated factors, (i) 
a preconceived purpose, (2) ability to see, and (3) 
ability to represent. 

1 . The Preconceived Purpose. The preconceived 
purpose of drawing varies with the individual 
and the occasion. It may be (a) to fix an object 
in consciousness, (b) to catalogue items of informa- 
tion, (c) to make a visual representation, (d) to 
interpret an artistic sentiment, or (e) to illustrate 
a scientific concept. One decides to sketch a 
route to the next village, another to record the 
parts in an automobile wheel, a third to draw a 
picture of his house, a fourth to interpret the 
tragedy of war, and a fifth to demonstrate the 
action of a force-pump. Then follow, each sub- 
ject to the original intent of the effort, the direc- 
tion of attention, the play of memory, the marshal- 
ling of ideas, the choice of interpretation, and the 
guidance of the hand. Whatever it may be, the 
purpose of the moment dominates the entire pro- 
cess of graphical expression. 

J57 



158 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

2. The Ability to See. (See pp. 97-99.) The 
ability to discriminate the particular character- 
istics of an object which should be shown in a draw- 
ing depends upon both native talent and train- 
ing. 1 A certain inherent perspicacity for, and a 
predisposed tendency toward, analytical observa- 
tion are fundamental and peculiar to each type 
of drawing. One individual may be given to the 
type of analysis which is demanded by artistic 
drawing, another to the analysis required by 
scientific drawing, and a third to that necessi- 
tated by representative drawing. Each procliv- 
ity favors one type of drawing and interferes more 
or less with the others. 

On the other hand, the ability to see with dis- 
crimination may be greatly improved by train- 
ing. (See p. 103.) One learns by experience to 
discover more readily the lines which exhibit 
artistic beauty, is taught to discriminate charac- 
teristics which are scientifically important, or 
comes in the course of training to recognize ele- 
ments of form which carry representative value. 
Successful training in any one or all of these is not 
impossible to any normal child. 

3. Ability to Represent. Given the same pre- 
conceived purpose and ability to see discriminat- 
ingly, achievement in drawing depends upon a 
number of closely interrelated factors. 

1 See footnote, p. 100. 



FINAL CONCLUSIONS 159 

(a) Visual Imagery. The clearness of visual 
imagery, particularly in memory drawing, is of 
great importance to accurate representation and 
is subject to great individual variation. With 
different individuals the drawing image may be 
(1) clear and distinct, (2) vague and incomplete, 
(3) distinct, but inaccurate, or (4) changeable and 
evanescent when the act of drawing begins. (See 
PP- 93, 94, and 99.) 

(b) Reflection. Knowledge of the physical char- 
acteristics of an object may serve to strengthen 
the visual image or even to substitute for it, as 
when one recalls that an object is just twice as 
long as it is broad. (See pp. 93-95.) 

(c) Memory Devices. The memory may be 
fortified by the acquisition of drawing schemata 
of common objects. The possession of a typical 
dog schema, for instance, is of great service when 
one attempts to make a drawing of the village 
bulldog "Buster." (See p. 100.) 

(d) Hand Control. The control of the hand 
movements when making regular lines which co- 
ordinate with the image or percept of the object 
fundamental to accurate drawing. (See pp. 99-100.) 

(e) Principles of Drawing. An acquired knowl- 
edge of drawing is necessary for the purposes of 
visual representation. (See p. 100.) 



160 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

(f) Synthetic Capacity. All drawing depends 
upon a final synthesis of the elements which have 
been isolated during the analysis which precedes 
the use of the pencil. (See p. 76.) One of the 
earliest of the child's difficulties with drawing is 
his incapacity to assemble parts into a synthesized 
whole. He is unable, for instance, to arrange 
the human features which he knows as separate 
units into a uniform face. Later on, synthetic 
incapacity remains to mar the symmetry of visual 
representation. Many drawers never see the 
"whole" object well enough to fit in the parts 
symmetrically. Finally, it is synthetic incapacity 
that sets the limits to the artistic interpretation 
of beauty and the scientific discovery of law. 

II. Adaptation of Laboratory Teaching. 

The psychological analysis of the drawing act 
shows that there is great variation among differ- 
ent individuals in ability to draw and in the man- 
ner in which graphic expression is utilized. Labor- 
atory procedure must be adapted to these varia- 
tions before the highest type of instruction is 
attainable. 

One of the earliest necessities, therefore, in 
science teaching is a study of the graphic propensi- 
ties of individual students. This may be done 
by subjecting them to tests similar to those de- 
scribed in Chapters V and VI. The teacher should 



FINAL CONCLUSIONS 161 

know the degree of ability and the cause for the 
superiority or the deficiency of every student in 
description and in representative, memory, and 
analytical drawing. Means should then be taken 
to improve defective ability whenever possible by 
special training and, whenever impossible, to 
adjust laboratory practice to the capability of the 
student. 

Improvement in the art of scientific expression 
may be secured through the co-operation of 
teachers of English and Drawing. The descrip- 
tions resulting from the foregoing experimental 
tests indicate that many of the subjects have had 
deficient training in accuracy of verbal expres- 
sion. (See Test No. 2, p. 113.) General terms 
and figures of speech often deceive both writer 
and reader as to the actual lack of any genuinely 
specific statements. Each reader supplies a dif- 
ferent set of imagery, which proves frequently 
upon psychological analysis to be widely removed 
from the reality of the original material. The 
pupil's description of a feather usually reads well 
if no check is made upon what is specifically said, 
because the reader unconsciously fills in the gaps 
with his own previous knowledge. It is different 
with a strange object like a microscope-clip. 
For most persons the expression "microscope- 
clip" fails to arouse any image or tendency to 
react toward it, and the student feels at once his 



162 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

need for specific terms of description. One college 
graduate was unable to write a single word of 
description about the microscope-clip, and a num- 
ber of others were practically helpless. Without 
question training in scientific expression is a 
legitimate, and should become a regular, part of 
the work in English. 

Achievement in scientific expression is similarly 
closely related to Drawing instruction. More- 
over, the development of skill in analytical "see- 
ing" is essential to the interests of artistic expres- 
sion itself. (See pp. 96 ff.) Drawing from mem- 
ory, appreciation of the scientific principles of 
drawing, ability to modify representative draw- 
ings so as to express some aesthetic ideal or to 
interpret or emphasize some salient aspect of an 
object or scene — one and all are dependent upon 
analytical observation. It is, therefore, not only 
important to the interests of science, but desir- 
able from the artistic point of view, that pupils 
learn early to analyze with discrimination for 
each type of graphical expression, whether it be 
visual representation, artistic interpretation, or 
scientific illustration. 

III. Analytical Observation. 1 

Laboratory procedure makes use of three devices 
to stimulate analytical observation, (1) repre- 

1 See p. 5 for definition of analytical observation. 



FINAL CONCLUSIONS 163 

sentative drawing, (2) description, and (3) analyt- 
ical drawing. 

I. Representative Drawing. 1 Representative 
drawing does not insure a consideration of the 
scientific aspects, or an analytical study of an 
object. (See Experiment IV, p. 150.) The pre- 
conceived purpose of reproducing a visual copy 
narrows the scope of observation, and the atten- 
tion, at best, is directed to items of form and 
color. There is nothing to call up associations 
which have to do with scientific ends. The atten- 
tion is, in fact, kept away from the associations 
that have to do with science as such. Even in 
:he province of form, sustained attention is not 
necessary. The pupil's drawing is always subject 
to direct comparison with the object at hand, so 
that extended study and reflection over its pro- 
portions are not necessary. It is a waste of time 
for the interests of scientific thinking to require 
pupils to spend extended periods of time at repre- 
sentative drawing. In fact, it is worse than a 
waste of time, for it encourages bad habits of 
analytical study which are opposed to interests 
of scientific thinking and constructive research. 
It is no wonder that so few of our picture-laden 
notebooks give evidence of scientific grasp or 
initiative. The excessive use of representative 
drawing is a serious pedagogical formalism which 

1 See p. 6. 



164 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

produces copyists instead of scientists and which 
creates distaste instead of enthusiasm for science, 

2. Description. The preconceived purpose of 
description gives a much broader direction to at- 
tention. (See Experiment IV, p. 150.) The at- 
tempt to describe an object directs attention to a 
large number of its characteristics and initiates an 
effort toward an analysis in terms of the subject's 
own knowledge and previous experience. The 
student who attempts to describe a feather thinks 
of its color, its shape, its use ; all he has ever known 
or thought about it is subject to the play of his 
reflection. The attitude of mind brought about 
is ideal, but for purposes of scientific analysis it 
lacks specific direction. The pupil is frequently 
unable to determine what characteristics of the 
object are of scientific importance. He not un- 
likely devotes the major portion of his time to 
describing the intricate color pattern of the feather, 
and may overlook entirely the structural elements 
which adapt the feather to the service of protec- 
tion or of flight. It is necessary, therefore, to 
supplement and direct the pupil's attempt at 
description. 

3. Analytical Drawing. 1 The preconceived pur- 
pose of analytical drawing supplies the direction 
of attention which is lacking in spontaneous 
description. The attention is directed to the 

1 See pp. 6-8 for definition of analytical drawing. 



FINAL CONCLUSIONS 165 

particular characteristics of the object which are 
of immediate scientific concern. The successful 
type, schematic, or diagrammatic drawing cannot 
be made without analytical study. The student 
who attempts to make a diagrammatic drawing 
showing how the parts of a wing feather are held 
together has before him a definite problem in 
analysis which necessitates sustained mental ef- 
fort to the end of the process of representation. 
(See Experiment I, p. 107.) 

IV. Laboratory Records. 

1. Representative Drawings. The results of the 
various special tests show that representative 
drawings do not afford a measure of the pupil's 
progress or an adequate record of the work which 
he has accomplished. 

2. Description. Description is a desirable record 
of the work of the pupil. It covers a wide range 
of observation and lacks only in the matter of the 
extra time required for the preparation of accurate 
and comprehensive statements, and for the teacher 
to make critical inspection. 

3. Analytical Drawings. Analytical drawings 
are ideal records of work accomplished and should 
be used wherever adaptable to the laboratory 
exercise. They require but a minimum of time for 
execution, can be made without exceptional skill 
of hand, and may be readily inspected. 



166 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

V. Retention. 

i. Representative Drawing. Representative 
drawing does not aid the memory. (See results of 
Experiment III.) As far as scientific concepts 
are concerned, it interferes with it. Many indi- 
viduals who can make excellent representative 
drawings are unable to remember what the object 
looks like. They fail in the attempt to draw from 
memory because of faulty and inaccurate observa- 
tion. Memory tests show that there is no corre- 
lation between retention and ability in represent- 
ative drawing. (See p. 142.) 

2. Description. Description aids retention by 
establishing numerous secondary associations dur- 
ing the period of observation and writing. (See 
pp. 142 and 152-153.) Subsequent recall is greatly 
facilitated by the number and strength of these 
associations. 

3. Analytical Drawing. Analytical drawing aids 
retention in the same manner as does description. 
Ability in analytical drawing is positively corre- 
lated with retention. (See p. 142.) The visual 
memory of the analytical schema serves as an 
additional support for the recall of associated 
ideas. 

4. Memory Drawings. The attempt to draw 
from memory tests the retention of space and 
form relationships. (See pp. 98 ff.) By means 
of subsequent comparison of the defective memory 



FINAL CONCLUSIONS 167 

drawing with the real object, the attention is 
directed to the things which had escaped recall 
while drawing. For instance, one attempts to 
draw his watch from memory and puts the second 
dial near the center. He then compares his draw- 
ing with the watch. What happens? He immedi- 
ately scrutinizes the characteristic which his 
earlier observation has failed to fix correctly in 
memory. Thus the attempt to draw from mem- 
ory supplies the direction of attention to the 
visual characteristics of an object which is lacking 
in representative drawing. 

VI. Recommendations. 

1. It is recommended that the directions of 
laboratory teaching shall be specifically adapted 
to the scientific purport of the hour. The direc- 
tions given for the conduct of Parts III and IV 
of Test No. 1, Experiment I, in the preceding 
chapter, are suggested as typical of the proper 
laboratory procedure. (See pp. in ff.) 

2. It is recommended that science teachers 
shall make an early study of their pupils to dis- 
cover individual variations in skill at graphic 
expression, and that laboratory instruction shall 
be adapted to the needs and capabilities of the 
individual members of the classes. 

3. It is recommended that special attention 
shall be given to training pupils in the art of 



168 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

scientific expression by teachers of English and 
Drawing. 

4. It is recommended that the device of repre- 
sentative drawing shall be supplanted in labora- 
tory teaching by the use of description, memory 
drawing, and analytical drawing. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

1. Albien, Gustav. "Der Anteil der nachkonstruierenden 

Tatigkeit des Auges und der Apperception an dem 
Behalten und der Wiedergabe einfacher Formen." 
Zeitschrift fur experimentelle Padagogik. V. u. VI. 
Bd. 1907. (Thirty-four plates in) Gratisbeilage, Bd. 
VI. 

An experimental study of the drawing act of great 
value. The author also reviews the history of the 
methods of education in drawing and gives a lengthy 
analytical discussion of the drawing act. 

2. Bailey, Henry Turner. Article on "Drawing." 

Monroe's Cyclopedia of Education. (Macmillan, 
1912.) II. 366. 
On the educational values of drawing. 

3. Bailey, Henry Turner. "Report on Industrial Draw- 

ing in Fifty-eighth Annual Report of the Board of 
Education." (Massachusetts. 1893-94.) Boston, 

1895- 

4. Baldwin, James M. "Mental Development in the 

Child and the Race." (Macmillan, New York, 1895.) 

5. Balfour, H. "The Evolution of Decorative Art." 

(Macmillan, 1893.) 

6. Ballard, P. B. "What Children Like to Draw." 

Journal of Experimental Pedagogy. 1913. 2: 127- 
129. 

7.. Barnes, Earl. "A Study of Children's Drawings." 
Pedagogical Seminary. December, 1893, pp. 451-463. 
One of the earliest attempts to interpret large 
groups of children's drawings. 

8. Barnes, Earl. "Child Study in Relation to Elemen- 
tary Art Education." In "Art Education in the 
Public Schools of the United States." (Haney. 

169 



176 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

American Art Annual. New York, 1908.) pp. 101- 

132. 

The author gives a comprehensive review of the 
literature of children's drawings with special refer- 
ence to the pedagogy of drawing. 
9. Barnes, Earl. "Studies in Education." (Stanford 
University and Philadelphia. 1897, 1902.) Vols. 
I and II. 

A series of short articles, both statistical and inter- 
pretive, on children's drawings. 

10. Bastin, E. S. "Laboratory Exercises in Botany." 

(Saunders, 1895.) 

11. Bechterew, W. V. "Objektive Psychologie." (Teub- 

ner, Leipsig, 1913.) p. 392, ff. 

12. Bechterew, W. V. "Recherches Objectives sur 

l'Evolution du Dessin chez l'Enfant." Journal de 
Psychologie Normale et Pathologique. V. 5. 191 1. 

A good description of the drawings of the patho- 
logically degenerate. 

13. Bergen, J. "Note-book to Accompany Botany Texts." 

(Ginn, 1904.) 

14. Bigelow, M. A. "The Teaching of Zoology." (In 

Lloyd and Bigelow, "The Teaching of Biology." 
Longmans, 1907.) 

15. Binet, Alfred. "Interpretation des Dessins." Revue 

Philosophique. December, 1890. 

16. Broerman, E. "L'Ecole dans la Nature." Revue de 

l'lnstitut International d'Art Public. VII et VIII. 
December, 1909. 

Contains: (a) International Inquiry on children's 
drawings; (b) Prehistoric drawings; (c) Free drawings 
of our children; (d) Reform of drawing instruction 
in France. 

17. Brown, Elmer E. "Notes on Children's Drawings." 

(University of California. 1897.) Vol. II, No. I. 

Interprets four biographical studies of children's 
drawings. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 171 

18. Brown, William. "The Essentials of Mental Measure- 

ment." (Cambridge University Press. 1911.) Part 
II, Correlation. 

An excellent discussion of the mathematical theory 
of correlation. 

19. Burk, Frederick. "The Genetic versus the Logical 

Order in Drawing." Pedagogical Seminary. Sep- 
tember, 1902. 

Includes a summary of studies in children's draw- 
ings and discusses pedagodical applications. 

20. Chamberlain, A. F. "The Child. A Study in the 

Evolution of Man." (Scribners, New York, 1900.) 
Chapter VI. The Arts of Childhood. 

An interesting treatment of children's drawings 
which includes numerous ethnological comparisons. 

21. Claparede Ed. (et Geux.) "Plan d'Experiences 

Collectives sur le Dessin des Enfants." Archives de 
Psychologie. Janvier, 1907. pp. 276-278. 

22. Clark, A. B. "The Child's Attitude toward Perspec- 

tive Problems." (Stanford University Studies in 
Education, 1897.) Vol. I, pp. 283-294. 

23. Clarke, I. E. "Art and Industry." (United States 

Bureau of Education. 1885-89.) Part I. 

An excellent source of information concerning the 
early development of industrial drawing in the United 
States. 

24. Cooke, Ebenezer. "Art Teaching and Child Nature." 

Journal of Education, London. December, 1885. 
January, 1886. 

An early treatment of children's drawings which 
has had considerable influence upon educational 
practice. 

25. Conn, H. W. "Biology." 1912. 

26. Curtis. "Laboratory Directions in General Zoology. " 

1912. 

27. Danzel, T. W. "Die Anfange der Schrift." (Voigt- 

lander , Leipsig,^ 1 9 1 2 .) 



172 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

28. Duck, J. "Uber das zeichnerische und kiinstlerische 

Interesse der Schuler." Zeitschrift fur experimen- 
telle Psychologic 13. 19. 12. 

The author gives particular emphasis to the 
changes of interest which occur at puberty. 

29. Elderton, Ethel. "On the Association of Drawing 

with Other Capacities in School Children." Biome- 
trika, 1909-10. pp. 222 ff. 

30. Farnum, Royal B. "Present Status of Drawing and 

Art in the Elementary and Secondary Schools of the 
United States." (Bulletin, 1914, No. 13. United 
States Bureau of Education.) 

Contains a fund of excellent source material. 
Includes: (a) Historical development; (b) Aims and 
scope in art teaching; (c) Organization, methods, and 
outlines; (d) Application and correlation; (e) Pic- 
ture study and school decoration; (f) Materials and 
equipment; (g) Art clubs and associations. 

31. Findley, Miss M. E. "Design in the Art Training of 

Young Children." Child Life, London, 1906-7. 

32. Fitz, H. T. "Freehand Drawing in Education." 

Popular Science Monthly. Vol. 36, pp. 397-400. 

A statistical account of the failure of the average 
school child to draw. 

33. Ganong, W. F. "The Teaching Botanist." (Macmil- 

lan, 1900.) 

34. Gennep, A. Van. "Dessins d'Enfant et Dessins Pre- 

historique." Archives de Psychologic X. Febru- 
ary, 1911. 

35. Gotze, Karl. "Das Kind als Kiinstler." (Hamburg, 

(1898.) 

36. Grosse, E. "Die Anfange der Kunst." (Leipsig, 1894.) 

(Also, ''The Beginnings of Art." Appleton, 1897.) 

37. Grosser, H m und Stern, W. "Das freie Zeichnen und 

Formen des Kindes." (Barth, Leipsig, 1913.) 

Contains a number of separate treatments of 
drawing and modeling. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 173 

38. Haddon, A. C. "Evolution in Art: As Illustrated by 

the Life-histories of Designs." (Scribners, 1914.) 

An excellent ethnological treatment of the evolu- 
tion of drawing as a decorative art. 

39. Hall, E. H. "The Teaching of Physics." (In Smith 

and Hall, "The Teaching of Chemistry and Physics," 
Longmans, 1904.) 

40. Hall, G. Stanley. "Contents of Children's Minds on 

Entering School." Pedagogical Seminary. 1902. 

41. Haney, James P. "The Development of Art Educa- 

tion in the Public Schools." (In "Art Education in 
the Public Schools of the United States." Edited by 
J. P. Haney. American Art Annual. 1908.) pp. 
21-77. 

A useful historical treatment of the development of 
drawing in the public schools of the United States. 

42. Hardest. "Laboratory Guide for Histology." 1908. 

43. Hind, C. Lewis. "The Education of the Artist." 

(London. 1907.) 

Contains an interesting discussion of the training 
of the artist, given chiefly from the point of view of 
the author's experience. 

44. Hogan, Louise. "A Study of a Child." New York. 

1898. 

45. Holmes, W. H. "Origin and Development of Form and 

Ornament in Ceramic Art." (Fourth Annual Report 

of the Bureau of Ethnology, Washington, 1886.) 

An excellent and frequently quoted source of 
materials. 

46. Howells, W. D. "A Little Girl among the Old Mas- 

ters." (New York. 1876.) 

Records the artistic development of a girl living 
in the midst of European art galleries. 

47. Ivanof, E. "Recherches experimentales sur le Dessin 

des Ecoliers de la Suisse romande. Correlation entre 
1' Aptitude au Dessin et les Autres Aptitudes." Ar- 



174 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

chives de Psychologie. VIII, No. 30. Decembre, 
1908. pp. 97-156. 

An elaborate analysis of the drawings collected 
from the inquiry instigated by Claparede and Geux, 
with special reference to the correlation between 
ability in drawing and other school subjects. 

48. Jessup, Walter A. "The Social Factors Affecting 

Special Supervision in the Public Schools of the 
United States." (Teachers College, Columbia Uni- 
versity, 1911.) Chapter III, "Drawing," pp. 18-31. 

49. Johonot, J. "Principles and Practice of Teaching." 

(Appleton, 1878.) 

50. Judd, C. H., and Cowling, D. J. "Studies in Percep- 

tual Development." Psychological Review. 1897. 
An experimental study of attempts to draw a 
simple figure from memory. 

51. Karrenberg, C. "Der Mensch als Zeichenobjekt." 

(Quelle and Meyer, Leipsig, 1910.) 

52. Katz, David. "Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Kinder- 

zeichnungen." Zeitschrift fiir Psychologie u. Phys. 
der Sinnesorgane. 1906. pp. 241-256. 

A study of the perceptual process of children dur- 
ing attempts to make drawings of pasteboard geo- 
metrical figures. 

53. Katzaroff, M. D. "Qu'est-ce les Enfants Dessinent?" 

Archives de Psychologie. IX. pp. 125-133. 

54. Kerschensteiner, George. "Die Entwickelung der 

zeichnerischen Begabung." (Gerber, Munich, 1905.) 

An elaborate and important inquiry involving some 
300,000 drawings of school children. One of the 
most influential works on the practical applications 
to teaching. Contains a wealth of discursive, sta- 
tistical, and illustrative material. 

55. Kik, C. "Die iibernormale Zeichenbegabung bei 

Kindern." Zeitschrift fiir angew. Psychologie. II. 
1908. pp. 92-149. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 175 

Contains a detailed treatment of the artistic ability 
of thirteen exceptionally gifted drawers. Gives 
particular emphasis to the relation of special merit 
in drawing to intellectual ability. 

56. "Kind, Das, und die Schule." Katalog zur Ausstellung 

Kind und Schule auf der Buchgewerbe-Ausstellung, 
Leipsig, 1914. (Diirr, Leipsig, 1914.) 

An important treatment of drawing, reading, 
modeling, writing, etc. 

57. Koch-Grunberg, Theodor. "Anfange der Kunst im 

Urwald." (Berlin, 1906.) 

Contains an interesting comparison of the draw- 
ings of children and primitive peoples. 

58. Kohler. Zeitschrift fur angewannte Psychologie u. 

Psychologie Sammelforsch. t Band I, 1908. 
See Stern, — Kohler, — Verworn. 

59. Kretzschmar, J. "Sammlungen freier Kinderzeich- 

nungen." Zeitschrift fur angewannte Psychologie. 
1910, 3. pp. 459-463. 

60. Lamprecht, Karl. "Les Dessins d'Enfants comme 

Source Historique. Bulletin de l'Academie Royale 
de Belgique, nos 9-10, pp. 457-469. 1906. 

Gives the method of a research which has been 
carried out on a vast international scale. 

61. Levinstein, Siegfried. "Kinderzeichnungen bis zum 

14 Lebensjahr. Mit Parallelen aus der Urgeschichte, 
Kulturgeschichte und Volkerkunde." (Voigtlander, 
Leipsig, 1905.) 169 pages, 85 plates, 18 graphs. 

An important statistical research with an added 
extended bibliography. Chapter I, The human 
figure; II, Animals and plants; III, Perspective and 
colors; IV, Stories; V, Drawing as a language; VI, 
Parallels with historical and ethnographical develop- 
ment; VII, Drawings of Esquimaux; VIII, Pedagogi- 
cal conclusions. 

62. Lindner, Rudolph. "Das Lesenlernen in der Taub- 

stummenschule. Das Kind und die Schule." Kata- 
log zur Kinder- Abteilung der Leipsiger Buchgewerbe 
Ausstellung. 19 14. p. 248, ff. 



176 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

63. Lobsien, M. "Kinderzeichnung und Kunstkanon." 

Zeitschrift fur padag. Psychologic 1905. pp. 393- 
404. 

Contains a comparison of children's drawings to 
the canons of classic art. 

64. Locke, Josephine, C. "With What Should Drawing 

Begin?" (Proceedings of the National Educational 
Association, 1893.) pp. 491 ff. 

65. Lukens, H. T. "A Study of Children's Drawings in 

the Early Years." Pedagogical Seminary. October, 
1896. 

Contains a summary of the studies in children's 
drawings up to 1896. 

66. Luquet, M. G. "Les Dessins d'un Enfant." (Alcan, 

Paris, 1913.) 150 plates. 262 pages. 

Contains a very complete analytical account of 
the drawings of a little girl from the age of three to 
nine years. The best biographical study to date. 

67. Maitland, Louise. "What Children Draw to Please 

Themselves." Inland Educator. September, 1895. 

68. Maxwell, W. H. "The New Course of Study." 1904. 

69. Messmer, O. "Zur Psychologie des Lesens bei Kindern 

und Erwachsenen." Archiv f. d. ges. Psychologie. 
II. 

70. Meumann, Ernst. "Ein Programm zur psycholo- 

gischen Untersuchung des Zeichnens." Zeitschrift 
fur pad. Psychologie. 1912. 

71. Meumann, Ernst. "Die Analyse des Zeichnens und 

des Modellierens." In "Vorlesungen zur Einfiihrung 
in die Experimentelle Podagogik." (Englemann, 
Leipsig, 1914.) 00. 693-775. 

Contains the most elaborate analysis of the psy- 
chology of drawing to date. Includes: 1, The de- 
velopment of drawing and the gift of drawing in the 
child; 2, Analysis of the gift for drawing; 3, The de- 
velopment of4the child's understanding of pictures 
and sculpture. 






BIBLIOGRAPHY 177 

72. Moore, K. C. "The Mental Development of a Child." 

The Psychological Review. October, 1896. 

73. O'Shea, M. V. "Children's Expression through Draw- 

ing." (Proceedings of the National Educational 
Association, 1894.) pp. 1015-1023. 

74. Pappenheim, Karl. "Bemerkungen iiber Kinder- 

zeichnungen." Zeitschrift fur Padagogische Psy- 
chologic March, 1891. 

75. Partridge, Sophie. "Children's Drawings." The 

Paidologist, London, November, 1904. 
An elaborate objective study of children's drawings. 

76. Patridge, Lena. "Children's Drawings of Men and 

Women." (Stanford University Studies in Educa- 
tion, 1900.) Vol. II, pp. 163-179. 

77. Passy, Jacques. "Notes sur les Dessins des Enfants." 

Revue Philosophique. December, 1891. pp. 614- 
621. 

78. Perez, Bernard. "L'Art et la Poesie chez l'Enfant." 

Paris, 1888. 

79. Peter, Rudolph. "Beitrage zur Analyse der zeich- 

nerischen Begabung." Zeitschrift fur Padagogische 
Psychologic Jarg. XV. February, 1914. 

80. Preyer, Wilhelm. "The Mind of the Child." (Trans- 

lated by W. H. Brown. New York, 1899.) 

81. Probst, M. "Les Dessins des Enfants Kabyles. " 

Archives de Psychologic 6:131-140. 1906. 

An interesting study of the drawings of children 

who had not been subject to the influence of a civilized 

environment. 
182. . "Report of Schools of Erie, Pennsylvania." 

1877-78. 
83. Ricci, Carrado. "L'Arte dei Bambini." (Bologna, 

1887.) 

An early and much quoted objective study of 
children's drawings. It is translated in part in the 
Pedagogical Seminary for October, 1895. 



178 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

84. Rooper, T. G. "Drawing in Primary Schools." New 

York, 1894. 

85. Rosen. "Darstellende Kunst im Kindesalter der Volk- 

er." Zeitschrift fur angewannte Psychologie. I, 
p. 93, ff. 

86. Rouma, G. "Le Langage Graphique de l'Enfant." 

(Alcan, Paris, 1913.) 

The most comprehensive treatment of children's 
drawings from the development viewpoint to date. 
Contains a preliminary chapter on methods of study, 
an excellent bibliography, and many graphs, tables 
figures, and plates. 

87. Ruttmann, W. J. "Die Ergebnisse der bisherigen 

Untersuchungen zur Psychologie des Zeichnens." 
(Wunderlich, Leipsig, 191 1.) 

Contains an excellent analytical summary of the 
important statistical and experimental studies of the 
psychology of drawing to 191 1. 

88. Sargent, Walter. "Fine and Industrial Arts in Ele- 

mentary Schools." (Ginn, 1912.) 

89. Sargent, Walter. "Problems in the Experimental 

Pedagogy of Drawing." Journal of Educational 
Psychology. May, 1912. 

90. Schuyten. "Het oorspronkelijk teekenen als bijdrage 

tot kinderanalyse." Paedolog. Jaarb. II. 1901. 
pp. 1 12-126. 

Attempts to measure the artistic development of 
the child on the basis of the degree of perfection of 
his drawings as compared to classic standards. 

91. Shinn, M. W. "Notes on the Development of a Child." 

(University of California Studies, Berkeley, 1899.) 

92. Simpson, B. R. "Correlation of Mental Abilities." 

(Columbia University, 1912.) 

93. Spearman, C. "Footrule for Measuring Correlation." 

British Journal of Psychology. 1906. pp. 89-109. 

94. Spencer, H. "Education." (Appleton, 1861.) 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 179 

95. Stern, C. u. W. "Die zeichnerische Entwickelung eines 

Knaben." Zeitschrift fiir angewannte Psychologie. 

III. yi. 1909. 

A study in the early developmental period of drawing. 

96. Stern, W. "Spezielle Beschreibung der Ausstellung 

freier Kinderzeichnungen aus Breslau." Bericht 
iiber den Kongres fiir Kinderforschung und Jugend- 
fiirsorge in Berlin. (1-4 October, 1906.) pp. 411-417. 

97. Stern, — Kohler, — Verworn. "Sammlungen freier 

Kinderzeichnungen." Zeitschrift fiir angewannte 
Psychologie. Sammelf. Band, I, 1908, pp. 179- 
187-472-476. Band II, Heft 1 and 2. 

Includes a discussion of the collections of children's 
drawings then in existence. 

98. Stiehler, Georg. "Beitragzur Psychologie und Meth- 

odik des Zeichnenunterrichts. (Osterwieck, Leipsig, 
1913.) 104 pages. 

An attempt to base drawing instruction upon ex- 
perimental psychology. Contains many excellent 
and practical suggestions. 

99. Stone, J. M. "The Relation of Nature Study to Draw- 

ing in the Public School." (Proceedings of the 
National Educational Association, 1900.) p. 524, ff. 

100. Sully, James. "Studies of Childhood." (Appleton, 

1908.) 

101. Tanner, Anna E. "The Child." (Rand, McNally, 

New York, 1904.) pp. 373-392. 

102. Terman, L. M. "Genius and Stupidity." Pedagogical 

Seminary, 1906. 

103. Thorndike, Edward L. "The Measurement of Achieve- 

ment in Drawing." Teachers College Record. 
November, 19 13. 

Contains a scale for the measurement of ability 
in representative drawing together with a discussion 
of the method of constructing the scale. 



i8o THE PS YCHOLOG Y OF DRA WING 

104. . "University of Chicago Entrance Requirements." 
1912. 

105. Verwoen, Max. "Zur Psychologie der primitiven 

Kunst." (Fisher, Jena, 1908.) 

106. Wagner, P. A. "Das freie zeichnen von Volksschul- 

kindern." Zeitschrift fur angewannte Psychologie. 
1913. 8: 1-30. 

Contains Stern's statistical investigation, Classi- 
fication made of the classes of possible motives, and 
percentages of frequency are given for representations 
of movement, human figure, indications of humor, etc. 
Four stages of development are recognized. 

107. Whipple, G. M. "Manual of Mental and Physical 

Tests." (Warwick and York, 1910.) 

108. Wilson, T. "Prehistoric Art." (Report of the United 

States Nat. Mus., 1896.) pp. 325-644. 

109. Wundt, Wilhelm. "Volkerpsychologie." (Engelmann, 

Leipsig, 1900-09.) 
no. Yule, G. U. "An Introduction to the Theory of 
Statistics." (Griffen, 1912.) 



INDEX 

Page 

Albien, G 41, 64, 87, 92, 141 

Analysis of drawing 46, 67, 87, 107, 157 

Analytical drawing 2, 6, 164 

Analytical observation 5, 98, 162 

Analytical study 156 

Attention, direction of 151 

Average Rank Difference 127 

Bailey, H. T 52 

Barnes, E 18, 19 

Bastin, E. S 56 

Becterew, W. V 77 

Bergen, J ' 56 

Bibliographical survey 15 

Bigelow, M. A 57 

Biographical method 36 

Bird, study of 154 

Brown, E. E 37 

Burk, F 73 

Chance Difference 127 

Claparede, E 25 

Clark, A. B 22 

Clark, I. E 51 

Comparative products method 33 

Conn, H. W 56 

Constructive drawing 93 

Correlation 9, 65 

method of determining 121 

rank method 122 

181 



i82 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

theory of 126 

with drawing 61, 107, 139, 143 

Cultural values of drawing 49 

Description 164 

and observation 151 

and retention 142 

as a laboratory device 2 

relation to drawing 107, 124, 130, 134 

Developmental stages 70, 73 

Diagram 1 13, 120 

Diagramming and description 107, 135 

Diagramming and representation 107, 135 

Difficulties of drawing 97, 153 

Drawing, aesthetic values of 51, 53 

analysis of 67, 87, 151 

analytical 6, 164 

and intellectual development 49 

as a language 52, 79, 83 

as mental discipline 51 

bibliographical survey of 15 

correlations 61 

cultural values of 49, 53 

difficulties of 97, 153 

freehand 54 

industrial values of 49 

involuntary 76 

memory {see Memory drawing) ; . 2 

representative {see Representative drawing) 2 

scientific value of 53 

spontaneous 8, 67 

stages of 70, 73 , 76 

types of 92 

university entrance requirements 54 



INDEX 183 

Elderton, E 59 

Experimental method 39 

Experiments, special 107, 156 

Farnum, R. B 50, 53 

Feather, study of 108 

Fixating seeing 42 

Ganong, W. F 56, 57 

General ability, and special 10, 64 

relation to drawing 58 

General intelligence 64 

Gross products, method 16 

studies in 67 

Haddon, A. C 34, 80, 82 

Hall, E. H 57 

Haney, J. P 49 

Hans Guck-in-die-Luft 20, 31, 72 

Hogan, L 38 

Human form 69 

Industrial values of drawing 49 

Intellectual development 49 

Introspection 10, 151 

Ivanof , E 26, 60 

Jessup, W 50 

Johnny Head-In-The-Air 20, 31 

Johonot, J 56 

Judd, C. H 40, 89, 91 

Karrenberg, C 103 

Katz, D 40 

Kerschensteiner, G 28, 36, 64, 74, 77, 82 

Kik, C 31, 62 



184 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

Laboratory, aims 107 

drawing 4, 163, 165 

procedure .3, 162 

method 1 

records 2, 134, 165 

teaching 1, 160 

Lamprecht, K 30 

Language and drawing 52, 79, 83, 161 

Levinstein, S 34, 36, 68, 69, 72, 79 

Lindner, R 36 

Lobsien, M 36 

Lukens, H. T 38, 79 

Luquet, M. G 38, 58, 69, 75, 78, 82 

Maitland, L 18, 67 

Maxwell, W. H 56 

Memory drawing 8, 43, 46, 99, 101, 159 

Memory, for color 150 

for dimensions 149 

for general design 150 

Mental analysis 10, 153 

Messmer, 95 

Methods of research 9, 15 

Meumann, E 41, 45, 66, 74, 80, 97, 100 

Motion, representation of 7 1 

Objective methods 15 

Observation 54, 96 

analysis of 151 

analytical 2, 11, 154 

Patridge, L 22, 168 

Pearson method 128 

Perceptual development 91 

Peter, R 45 



INDEX 185 

Preconceived purpose 89, 157 

Probst, M 24, 68 

Psychological analysis 4, 107, 157 

Rank method 122 

Realim, logical and visual 76, 78, 82 

Recommendations 167 

Reflection 159 

Representative drawing 43, 46, 103, 163 

ability in 158 

analysis 151 

and retention 142 

as a laboratory device 2 

definition of 6 

relation to description 107 

relation to diagramming 107 

Retention, and description 141 

and drawing 142 

devices for 141 

in laboratory procedure 3 

types of 100 

Ricci, C 17 

Rouma, G 16, 18, 26, 36, 59, 64, 66, 69, 70, 78, 83 

Ruttmann, W. J 16, 18, 33 

Sargent, W 52 

Sash-lift, study of 144 

Schema 8, 74, 100, 159 

School grades 136 

Schuyten, H 23, 36 

Scientific expression 162 

Scientific values of drawing 55 

Scoring methods 1 14, 142 

Seeing ability 158 

Simpson, B. R 65 



186 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF DRAWING 

Smith, W 50 

Spearman method 128 

Special aptitudes 58 

Special products method 18 

Speech and drawing 79 

Spencer, H 56 

Stages of drawing 70, 73, 74, 76, 79 

Stern.W 32, 38 

Stiehler, G 44, 66, 77 

Subjective methods 16 

Synthetic incapacity 76, 82, 160 

Terman, L. M 64 

Tests, analytic 9 

Thorndike, E. L 77 

Triangle, study of 144 

Types of drawing 72, 92 

Types of reading 95 

Verworn, M 75 

Visual drawing 92 

Visual imagery 99, 159 

Wagner, F. H 32 

Wundt, W 35 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Nov. 2004 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township. PA 16066 



